F E R D I N A N D DE S A U S S U R E

ORIGIN AND DEYELOPPIENT OF HIS LINGUISTIC THEORY

I N WESTERN STUDIES OF LANGUAGE.

A C r i t i c a l Evaluation

of t h e E v o l u t i o n of Saussurean P r i n c i p l e s

and T h e i r Relevance t o Contemporary L i n g u i s t i c T h e o r i e s

by

E r n s t F r i d e r y k Konrad K O ER N E R

PhiZosophicm, F r e i e U n i v e r s i t z t B e r l i n , 1965

Staatsemnen, J u s t u s L i e b i g U n i v e r s i t z t Giessen, 1968

Magister Artim, J u s t u s L i e b i g U n i v e r s i t g t Giessen, 1968

A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED I N PARTIAL FULFImENT

OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF

DOCTOR OF PHIIDSOPHY

i n General L i n g u i s t i c s

i n t h e Department

0f

Modern Languages

ERNST FRIDERYK KONRAD K 0 E R N E R 1971

S IMON FRAS ER UNIVERS I'N

December 1971
 I

APPROVAL

Name : Erns t F r i d e r y k Konrad Koerner

Degree: Doctor of Philosophy

T i t l e of Thesis: Ferdinand d e S a u s s u r e . O r i g i n and development

of h i s l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y i n w e s t e r n s t u d i e s of
language: A c r i t i c a l e v a l u a t i o n of Saussurean
p r i n c i p l e s and t h e i r r e l e v a n c e t o contemporary
linguistic theories.

Examining C omrnit t ee:

Chairman: N e v i l l e J. L i n c o l n

Geoffrey L. B u r s i l l - H a l l
Senior Supervisor

Marguerite Saint-Jacques

B r i a n E. Newton

D e l l H. Hymes
E x t e r n a l Examiner
Professor
U n i v e r s i t y of Pennsylvania

Date Approved:
 I

ABSTRACT

The p r e s e n t s t u d y c o n s t i t u t e s a c o n t r i b u t i o n t o g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c
t h e o r y and t o t h e h i s t o r y of l i n g u i s t i c s . The c h o i c e o f Ferdinand d e
S a u s s u r e a s t h e c e n t r a l f i g u r e of t h e i n v e s t i g a t i o n i s based on t h e
f o l l o w i n g t r a d i t i o n a l assumptions: 1 ) S a u s s u r e h a s been almost unani-
mously r e g a r d e d a s t h e founder of modern s t r u c t u r a l l i n g u i s t i c s ; 2)
h i s posthumous Corns d e Zinguis t i q u e g&&a Ze h a s g e n e r a l l y been i n t e r -
p r e t e d as a complete b r e a k w i t h p r e v i o u s t h e o r i e s of language, i n par-
t i c u l a r t h o s e of t h e J u n g g r a m a t i k e r , and 3) modern l i n g u i s t s have
tended t o r e g a r d h i s achievements a s t h e c r e a t i v e a c t of a geniuslwho
was c o m p l e t e l y independent of t h e i n t e l l e c t u a l atmosphere of h i s time.
S i n c e t h e s e views have been e x p r e s s e d i n a l l h i s t o r i e s of l i n g u i s t i c s
up t o t h e p r e s e n t d a t e , and p a r t i c u l a r l y b e c a u s e our own f i n d i n g s do n o t
confirm t h i s , we have found s u f f i c i e n t r e a s o n t o q u e s t i o n t h e manner
i n which t h e h i s t o r y of l i n g u i s t i c s h a s b e e n w r i t t e n .
H i s t o r i e s of l i n g u i s t i c s 1 ) h a v e been a l m o s t e x c l u s i v e l y concerned
w i t h r e l a t i n g i d e a s a b o u t language and i t s s t u d y i n a merely chronolo-
g i c a l manner ( s u g g e s t i n g a t t h e same t i m e t h a t contemporary i d e a s a r e
much more s o p h i s t i c a t e d , a d e q u a t e , and n a t u r a l l y s u p e r i o r ) ; 2) a r e
f r e q u e n t l y based on e a r l i e r a c c o u n t s r e l y i n g h e a v i l y on secondary s o u r c e s ;
3) h a v e r e g a r d e d developments i n l i n g u i s t i c thought a l m o s t completely
i n i s o l a t i o n and h a v e n o t t a k e n i n t o a c c o u n t t h e i r s o c i o - p o l i t i c a l and
c u l t u r a l background, and 4) h a v e n o t t o d a t e s e r i o u s l y a t t e m p t e d t o
c o n s t r u c t a t h e o r y of how t h e h i s t o r y of l i n g u i s t i c s should b e w r i t t e n .
I n view of t h e d i s t o r t e d p i c t u r e of S a u s s u r e ' s p o s i t i o n i n t h e
h i s t o r y of l i n g u i s t i c s and t h e inadequacy of t h e work of p r e v i o u s h i s -
t o r i a n s of l i n g u i s t i c s , t h e f i r s t p a r t of o u r s t u d y a t t e m p t s t o i l l u s -
t r a t e , by r e s t r i c t i n g our a t t e n t i o n t o a s p e c i f i c p e r i o d of t i m e and a
p a r t i c u l a r c u l t u r a l and h i s t o r i c a l a r e a , t h e manner i n which t h e a c c o u n t
of l i n g u i s t i c thought of t h e p a s t s h o u l d h e p r e s e n t e d . In this part
t h e concept of paradigm i s i n t r o d u c e d i.n t h e s e n s e of i n t e l l e c t u a l

iii
 / atmosphere p r e v a i l i n g a t a g i v e n t i m e w i t h i n a s p e c i f i c s o c i o - p o l i t i c a l
and c u l t u r a l s e t t i n g . L i n g u i s t i c t h o u g h t r e f l e c t s mutatis mutandis t h e
paradigm of i t s time and indeed w e would a r g u e t h a t t h e h i s t o r y of
l i n g u i s t i c s r e p r e s e n t s t h e h i s t o r y of i d e a s par exceZZence. Saussure's
i d e a s a b o u t t h e n a t u r e of language c o n s t i t u t e a n example of how t h e
paradigm of h i s t i m e had a n impact on h i s t h e o r y . While w e deny t h a t
S a u s s u r e w a s d i r e c t l y i n f l u e n c e d by s o c i o l o g i c a l , economic, p s y c h o l o g i c a l
o r p h i l o s o p h i c a l c o n c e p t s of t h e 1 9 t h c e n t u r y , h i s argument r e v e a l s
t h a t h e belonged t o t h e paradigm of t h e l a t e 1 9 t h c e n t u r y and t h e t u r n
of t h i s c e n t u r y ; h i s most immediate s o u r c e s of i n s p i r a t i o n were t h e
Zinguistic s t u d i e s of h i s own time.
A f t e r h a v i n g o u t l i n e d , i n t h e f i r s t p a r t , how S a u s s u r e q s l i n g u i s t i c
thought evolved from t h e paradigm of h i s t h e and a l s o t h e way i n which
h e s u r p a s s e d h i s p r e d e c e s s o r s and contemporaries by c r e a t i n g a new frame
/' of r e f e r e n c e w i t h i n which l i n g u i s t i c s s h o u l d o p e r a t e , t h e second p a r t
d e v o t e s p a r t i c u l a r a t t e n t i o n t o t h e manner i n which s u b s e q u e n t g e n e r a t i o n s
J/ ,of l i n g u i s t s have succeeded o r f a i l e d t o work o u t t h e p r o p o s a l s l a i d
down I n t h e C o w s . A f t e r a n a n a l y s i s of t h e f o u r main a s p e c t s of Saus-
V

s u r e ' s t h e o r y , i.e . 1 ) t h e d i s t i n c t i o n s between Zangue and parole,

2) synchrony and d i a c h r o n y , 3) s y n t a g m a t i c and p a r a d i g m a t i c r e l a t i o n s
and 4) h i s l i d e a s about t h e s e m i o l o g i c a l n a t u r e of language, i n t h e l i g h t
of 20th-century developsr~ents, we have concluded t h a t t h e new paradigm
p u t forward by S a u s s u r e h a s n o t y e t been welded i n t o a n o v e r a l l g e n e r a l
t h e o r y of language a s envisaged by S a u s s u r e some f i f t y y e a r s ago.
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

d l i k e t o t a k e t h e o p p o r t u n i t y of e x p r e s s i n g my g r a t i t u d e
and i n d e b t e d n e s s towards t h e f o l l o w i n g p e r s o n s and i n s t i t u t i o n s :
F i r s t l y , I wish t o thank t h e Government of Canada, r e p r e s e n t e d by t h e
Canada Council i n Ottawa, f o r i t s f i n a n c i a l s u p p o r t d u r i n g t h e y e a r s
1968 t o 1971 which enabled me t o c o n c e n t r a t e most of my e f f o r t s on
r e s e a r c h work and completion of my d i s s e r t a t i o n . Secondly, and t h i s
h a s c e r t a i n l y n o t been of l e s s importance t o me, though my i n d e b t e d n e s s
cannot b e e x p r e s s e d i n m a t e r i a l t e r m s , I w i s h t o e x p r e s s my s i n c e r e s t
g r a t i t u d e t o my s e n i o r s u p e r v i s o r , P r o f e s s o r G. L. B u r s i l l - H a l l , for.
h i s c o n t i n u e d i n t e r e s t i n my work, h i s encouragement a t v a r i o u s s t a g e s
of i t s w r i t i n g , and p a r t i c u l a r l y f o r h i s c a r e f u l , c r i t i c a l , and always
very h e l p f u l supervision.
L a s t b u t n o t l e a s t two p e r s o n s d e s e r v e t o b e mentioned whose a s s i s -
t a n c e h a s b e e n v e r y v a l u a b l e t o me: M r s . H i l a r y Jones who h e l p e d me i n
proof-reading and s u g g e s t e d many s t y l i s t i c improvements, and Mrs. Heather
Troche who p r e p a r e d t h e f i n a l d r a f t of t h e manuscript w i t h g r e a t c a r e .
It goes w i t h o u t s a y i n g t h a t t h e remaining weaknesses of t h e t h e s i s a r e
a l l my own r e s p o n s i b i l i t y .

Vancouver, November 8 t h , 19 7 1 E. F. K. Koerner

 ,
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT .......................... v

TABLE OF CONTENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi

MASTER LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS OF PERIODICALS AND SERIES ....... x

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS FOR FESTSCHRIFTEN, COLLECTIONS OF ARTICLES

BY VARIOUS AUTHORS, AND PROCEEDINGS OF LINGUISTIC AND OTHEP,
RELEVANT CONGRESSES OR CONFERENCES ............... xxviii

FURTHER ABBREVIATIONS AND SIGLA USED I N THIS STUDY . . . . . . . . xxxvii

0.0 INTRODUCTION: Outline of the Goal of the Investigation .... 1

1.0 F. DE SAUSSURE AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF HIS LINGUISTIC THEORY .. 20

1.1 A Biographical ~ke'tc'hon Ferdinand de Saussure ........ 20

1.2 The Intellectual Paradigm of Saussure's Formative Years . . . . 37

1.2.1 The Question of E x t r a - L i n g u i s t i c I n f l u e n c e s on S a u s s u r e ... 37

1.2.1.1 Durkheimfs P r i n c i p l e s o f S o c i o l o g y , T a r d e ' s S o c i o l o g i c a l

and Economic T h e o r i e s , a n d S a u s s u r e f s A l l e g e d S o c i o l o g i s m 45

1.2.1.2 Walrasf T h e o r i e s of P o l i t i c a l Economy and t h e Saussurean

Conceptofvalue .................... 67

1.3 The Question of Linguistic Influences on Saussure . . . . . . . 72

1.3.1 Whitney and H i s C o n s i d e r a t i o n of G e n e r a l L i n g u i s t i c Problems 74

1.3.2 Neogramnarian T e n e t s c o n c e r n i n g t h e P r i n c i p l e s of Language

( w i t h s p e c i a l r e f e r e n c e t o P a u l and S i e v e r s ) ....... 101

1.3.2.1 The P o s i t i o n of t h e Neogrammarians i n Contemporary H i s t o r i e s

ofLinguistics ..................... 101
 vii

Page

1.3.2.2 Hermann Paul and H i s p & i n c i p l e s o f Language Study ..... 107

1.3.2.2.1 Paul ' s Distinction between Descriptive and HistoricaZ

Linguistics, and the Aspect of Language S t a t e . . . . -. 108

1.3.2.2.2 Language Usage versus Individual Expression ...... 113

1.3.2.2.3 Formal and Material Connections of Words . . . . . .' . . 116

1.3.2.3 Eduard S i e v e r s and H i s P r i n c i p l e s o f Phonetics . . . . . . 125

1.3.3 Baudouin d e Courtenay, Kruszewski, and Their Ideas about

Language Study i n General and T h e i r Theories of Phonological
Analysis i n P a r t i c u l a r .................. 133

1.3.3.1 S a u s s u r e ' s Acquaintance w i t h t h e work of t h e 'Kazan S c h o o l t ,

and t h e Importance o f H i s E a r l i e r Work on Baudouin de
Courtenay and Kruszewski ............... . 133

1.3.3.2 J. Baudouin de Courtenay and H i s I d e a s concerning t h e

................
I n v e s t i g a t i o n o f Language 138

1.3.3.3 Miko3aj Kruszewski's L i n g u i s t i c Theories . . . . . . . . . 148

1.3.4 The Humboldtian T r a d i t i o n i n Nineteenth Century L i n g u i s t i c s . 166

1.3.4.1 A B r i e f Survey o f Humboldtian Trends a t t h e Turn o f t h e

Century ........................ 166

1.3.4.2 Georg von der Gabelentz and H i s Suggestions concerning t h e

G e n e r a l s t u d y o f Language ................ 174

2.3.4.2.1 GabeZentz ' s Limited Recognition i n the History o f

Linguistics. ..................... 174

2.3.4.2.2 Gabelentz's Principles of General Linguistics . . . . . . 176

1.3.4.3 F. N. Finck and Some General Considerations concerning

Language D e s c r i p t i o n .................. 195

1.4 Concluding Remarks on the F i r s t Part of the Investigation . . . 202

 viii

Page

2.0 THE EVOLUTION OF SAUSSUREAN PRINCIPLES AND THEIR RELEVANCE

TO CONTEMPORARY THEORIES OF LANGUAGE ............ 210

2.1 The Compilation o f the Corns and t h e Problems o f I n t e r p r e t a t i o n 213

2.2 Discussion o f t h e Fundamental Concepts o f Saussure's L i n g u i s t i c

Theory and T h e i r Post-Saussurean E v o l u t i o n ......... 223

2.2.1 The D i s t i n c t i o n between Langue and paroze, and Its R e l a t i o n

t o Zangage. ....................... 224

2.2.1.1 Prec-ursors o f t h e Zangue/paroZe Dichotow o r t h e Langue/

paroze/Zangage T r i c h o t o w ............... 224

2.2.1.2 The Development and Place of t h e Zangue/ptrrole/Zangage

D i s t i n c t i o n i n Saussure's Theory of Language ...... 228

2.2.1.3 Post-Saussurean Developments of t h e Concepts o f Zangue,

parole, and Zangage .................. 243

2.2.2 The Dichotomy of Synchrony versus Diachrony i n Language

Description ...................... 263

2.2.2.1 A Brief Survey of t h e ?re-Saussurean D i s t i n c t i o n between

D e s c r i p t i v e and H i s t o r i c a l Grammar ........... 263

2.2.2.2 The I z t e r p r e t a t i o n of Saussure's D i s t i n c t i o n b e t ~ e e n

Synchronic and Ciachronic L i n g u i s t i c s ......... 284

2.2.2.3 Post-Sams=ean Discussions o f t h e D i s t i n c t i o n between

Synchrony and Diachrcny i n L i n f l i s t i c s ......... 295

2.2.3 The Concept of t h e Language Sign and Related Notions .... 311

2.2.3.1 The 0,ue;tion of t h e Sources of S a u s s u r e T s Semiological

Theory ........................ 312

 ix

Page
I

2.2.3.2 S a w s u r e l s Theory of t h e Language Sign and t h e

Semiological Nature of Language ............
2.2.3.3 Post-Saussurean Developments i n Semiological Theory ...
2.2.4 Language a s a System of Relations: t h e r a p p r t s syntapcz-
tiques e t associatifs and Kindred Notions ........
2.2.4.1 T r z d i t i o n a l Ideas about t h e S y s t e n a t i c Nature of Language

2.2.4.2 S a u s s u r e l s Suggestions concerning t h e Systematic Netwe

of Languag c ......................
2.2.4.3 Post-Saussurean Developments of t h e Nature of Language
a s a S y s t e m o f Relations ............... 369

2.3 Concluding Remarks on the Second Part of the Inquiry . . . . 378

3.0 CONCLUSION: Saussure's COWS and the State o f Linguistic

Science ......................... 389

MASTER LIST OF REFERENCES .................... 402

 AbhandZungen der (Preussischen) Akademie der Wissen-
schaften. P h i l o s o p h i s c h - h i s t o r i s c h e Klasse. B e r l i n
1804-1907.
AES Archives Europzennes de Socio Zogie . P a r i s 196O-
AfdA Anzeiger fiir deutsches Altertwn und deutsche ( L i t ( t ) -
eratur. L e i p z i g , l a t e r on B e r l i n & Wiesbaden 1876- ;
supplement t o ---+ ZfdA.
Af GPhon
supersedes -
Archiv f21r die gesamte Phonetik.
Vox.
p a r a l l e l publications :
B e r l i n 1937-1943144;
T h i s j o u r n a l c o n s i s t e d of two
I. Archiv fiir v e r g l e i c h e n d e
Phonetik ( s . ---+ AfVPhon) , and 11. Archiv f i i r
Sprach- und Stimmphysiologie und Sprach- und S t i m -
heilkunde. B e r l i n 1937-42 [= 6 v o l s ] ..
Archiv filr vergleichende Phonetik. B e r l i n 1937-44
[= 7 v o l s . I . s u p e r s e d e d by ---+ ZPhon. [S. a l s o ----+
A fGPhon ] .
AGI Archivio GZottoZogico ItaZiano. Torins~irenze-
Roma 1873-
AKAWB see ---t A(P)AWB
AION- L Annuli deZZ 'Institute (Universitario) OrientaZe.
Sezione Linguistica. Napoli 1958-
AJPh = AJP The American J o u m Z of PhiZoZogy. B a l t i m o r e , Md.
1880-
AJut Zandica Acta Jutlandica. A a r s k r i f t f o r Aarhus U n i v e r s i t e t .
Aarhus & Kbbenhavn 1929-

* Wherever p o s s i b l e t h e a b b r e v i a t i o n s employed i n t h i s l i s t f o l l o w
t h o s e o f t h e Bib Ziographie Zinguistique de Z 'anne'e 19 6 8 comp. by J J . .
~ e ~ 1 s m i .(tU t r e c h t & Antwerp: Spectrum, 1 9 7 0 ) , pp. xv f f .
AL = ALH Acta Linguistica (Hafniensia). International Journal
of S t r u c t u r a l L i n g u i s t i c s . Copenhagen 1939-
Acta Linguistica Academiae S c i e n t i a r m Hungaricae.
Budapest 1951-
ANF Arkiv f& Nordisk FiZoZogi. Lund 1893-
AnnEPHE EcoZe Pratique des Hautes Etudes. Annuaire. IVe
Section: Sciences h i s t o r i q u e s et philologiques.
P a r i s 1893-
ANPE Archives Nzer~andaisesde ~ h o n z t i ~ u~ex ~ & i m e n t a Z e .
A s s o c i a t i o n n g e r l a n d a i s e des S c i e n c e s phpn&iques.
La Haye 1926-35 [= 1 2 v o l s . ] .
/

ANT AZtaZ6nos iVyeZv&zeti ~anuZm6nyok. [ S t u d i e s i n g e n e r a l

linguistics]. Budapest 1963-
AnthrL = AnL AnthropoZogicaZ Linguistics. Bloomington, Ind. 1959-
r
A0 Archiv OrientaZni. J o u r n a l o f t h e Czechoslovak O r i e n t a l
Institut. Prague 1931-
Archivwn Linguisticwn. A Review of Comparative P h i l o l o g y
and General L i n g u i s t i c s . Glasgow 1949-
A(K)SGWL = ASAW AbhandZungen der (KijnigZichen) Sdchsischen GeseZZsehaft/
Akademie der Wissenschaften. L e i p z i g 1846-1918.
ASLU = AUU Acta Societas Linguisticae UpsaZiensis. Uppsala,
N. S. 1962-
ASP Archiv ffi sZavische PhiZoZogie. B e r l i n 1876-1929
[= 42 v o l s . + 1 suppl.] [Repr. The Hague: Mouton,
19661.
ASNS Archiv &?if das Studiwn der neueren Sprachen und Litera-
turen. E l b e r f e l d , t h e n Braunschweig and l a t e r on
B e r l i n 1846- ; a l s o r e f e r r e d t o as "Herrigs Archiv".
A ( K ) WAW Anzeiger der (Kaiserlichen) Wiener Academie der Wissen-
schaften. Philosophisch-historische Klasse. Wien
1864-
0

Vetenskaps-societeten i Lund. Arsbok. Lund 1920-

(Bezzenbergers) Beitrdge zur Kunde der indogemanisehen
Sprachen. GGttingen 1877-1906 [ = 30 v o l s . I . Merged
into ---t KZ.
 xii

BCLC B u l l e t i n du CercZe Linguistique de Copenhague.

Copenhaguk 1934-41 [= 6 v o l s . ] .
BFCZ BoZZetino d i FiZoZogia CZassica. Torino 1894-1942
[= 49 v o l s . 1.
BIFR BuZetinuZ InstituZui de FiZoZogie ~ o m i & "AZexandru
Phi Zippide ". I a q i [= J a s s y ] /Rumania 19 33?-
BJR B u l l e t i n des Jeunes Romanistes. S t r a s b o u r g 1960-
B (K)SGWL Berichte der (Kiinig lichen) S2chsischen Gese ZZschaf t
der Wissenschaften. L e i p z i g 1846-48; N . S . 1849-
1918.
BPh Ws Berliner philo Zogische Wochenschrift . S . ---+PhWs
BPTJ BiuZetyn PoZskiego Towarzystwa Jezykoznmczego.
B u l l e t i n d e l a ~ o c i g t 6p o l o n a i s e d e L i n g u i s t i q u e .
Wroclaw & ~ r a k 6 w1927-
BRPh Beitrage zur Romanischen Phi ZoZogie. B e r l i n 19 6 l -
BSHA B u l l e t i n de l a Socie't6 dPHistoire e t dtArchdoZogie de
.
Genave Genzve 190 2-
BSI = BLI Beitrzge zur Sprachkunde [since 2966: L i n g u i s t i k ]
und zur Informationsverarbeitung. Miinchen & Wien
19 63-
BSLP BuZZetin de Za SociGt6 de Linguistique de Paris.
P a r i s 1869-
BORJL BuZZetin ?stavu Ruskdho Jazyka a Literatury. Praha
1956.
BVSAW Berichte iiber d i e VerhandZungen [ s i n c e 1849: Abhand-
Zungen] der SiEchsischen Akademie der Wissenschaften
zu Leipzig. Philologisch-historische Klasse.
L e i p z i g 1846-48; N.S. 1849-1918. S. a l s o ---+ B(K)SGL.
BVSGW Berichte iiber die VerhandZungen der SiEchsischen GeseZZ-
schaft der Wissenschaften. S. ---+ BVSAW.
BVSpr B e i t d g e zur vergzeichenden Sprachforschung auf dem
Gebiete der mischen, ceZtischen und sZavischen
Sprachen. B e r l i n 1858-76; merged i n t o
(ZfvSpr =I KZ.
-
 xiii
CFS Cahiers Ferdinand de Saussure. ~ u b l i g sp a r l a ~ o c i g t ;
genevoise d e Linguistique. ~ e n g v e19 41-
CILUP Confirsnces de 2 ' I n s t i t u t de Linguistique de Z 'Univer-
s i t z de Paris. P a r i s 1934-
CJL = RCL Canadian JournaZ of Linguistics/Revue Canudienne de
Linguistique. [Formerly: J o u r n a l of t h e Canadian
L i n g u i s t i c Association/Revue d e l l A s s o c i a t i o n
canadienne d e L i n g u i s t i q u e ] . Toronto 1955-
CLS Cahiers de Linguistique Structura Ze . pub l i 6 s s o u s
l e s a u s p i c e s d e l a ~ a c u l t 6d e s L e t t r e s d e 1'Univer-
sit6 Laval. Laval, ~ u 6 b e c1952- [ i r r e g . ] .
CLTA Cahiers de Linguis tique !The'orique e t ~ p Ziquze.
p
Bucharest 1962-
CoZZE CoZZege EngZish. A n O f f i c i a l Organ of t h e N a t i o n a l
Coundil of Teachers of English. Champaign, I l l .
1939-
CRAI Comptes Rendus de Z '~cad6rniedes Inscriptions e t BeZZes-
Lettres. P a r i s 1857-64, 1865-71; 1872; 1873-
CSIP = RCSZ Canadian SZavonic Papers/Revue canadienne des SZavistes.
The Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n of S l a v i s t s / L ' A s s o c i a t i o n
canadienne d e s S l a v i s t e s . Toronto 1959-
CuZtura NeoZitana. Bollettino d e l l l I n t i t u t o d i Filo-
l o g i a romanza d e l l a ~ n i v e r s i t zd i Roma. Modena
1940-
La Cuztura. R i v i s t a mensile de f i l o s o f i a , l e t t e r e ,
arte. Roma & F i r e n z e 1921-35 [= 1 4 v o l s . ] ; N.S.,
s u b t i t l e d 'I1 s a g g i a t o r e ' , Milano 1959-
Curtius Studien (Curtius') Studien zur griechischen und Zateinischen
Grammatik. L e i p z i g 1868-77178 [= 1 0 v o l s . ; r e p .
Hildesheim: G. O l m s , 1969-70 (= 4572 pp. a l t o g e t h e r ) ] .
CW !&e CZassicaZ Weekly, [ l a t e r on: !The CZassicaZ World).
New York 1907-
Y

~ M F Casopis pro Modern; FiZoZogii. Praha 1914- ; d u r i n g

t h e y e a r s 1963-66 i n c o r p o r a t e d i n ---+ PhP.
 xiv

Y
~acoromnia Dacoromania. B u l e t i n u l Muzeului l i m b e i romane.
Cluj Univdrsitatea. C l u j /Rumania 19 20-21-
DaFS Deutsch aZs Fremdsprache. Z e i t s c h r i f t z u r T h e o r i e und
P r a x i s d e s D e u t s c h u n t e r r i c h t s f i i r Auslznder. Herder-
I n s t i t u t , Leipzig. L e i p z i g 1964-
Dergi Dergi. S t u d i e s by Members of t h e E n g l i s h Department,
I s t a n b u l ~ n i v e r s i t y / I s t a n b u lU n i v e r s i t e s i Edebiyat
Fakiiltesi Yayinlari I n g i l i z F i l o l o g i s i Dergisi.
I s t a n b u l 1950-53; s u p e r s e d e d by ---+ Litera.
~ i o g z n e . Revue i n t e r n a t i o n a l e d e s S c i e n c e s humaines .
P a r i s 1952-
Diogenes Diogenes. An I n t e r n a t i o n a l Review of Philosophy and
Humanistic S t u d i e s . M o n t r e a l 1953- (= E. v e r s i o n
of --.t Diogene). [There i s a l s o a Span. ed. which
a p p e a r s i n Buenos A i r e s as w e l l a s a J a p . one pub-
l i s h e d i n Tokyo].
DLZ Deutsche L i t ( t ) e r a t m z e i t u n g f i b K r i t i k der i n t e r -
nationaZen Wissenschaft. B e r l i n 1880-
Der Deutschunterricht. B e i t r g g e zu s e i n e r P r a x i s und
w i s s e n s c h a f t l i c h e n Grundlegung. S t u t t g a r t 1949-
Deutsche V i e r t eZjahrsschri f t fiir L i t e r a t m i s s enschaft
und Geistesgeschichte. S t u t t g a r t 1923-
Ezik i L i t e r a t m a . S o f i j a 1945-
EngZische Studien. Organ f i i r e n g l i s c h e P h i l o l o g i e
u n t e r Beriicksichtigung d e s e n g l i s c h e n U n t e r r i c h t s
auf hiiheren Schulen. Heilbronn [and t h e f i r s t few
i s s u e s a l s o ] P a r i s & London, [ s i n c e 1890:l L e i p z i g
1877-
Foundations of Language. I n t e r n a t i o n a l J o u r n a l of
Language and Philosophy. ~ o r d r e c h t / T h eN e t h e r l a n d s
1965-
Le F r a n ~ a i sModeme. Revue d e l i n g u i s t i q u e f r a n ~ a i s e .
P a r i s 1933-
 FoZia Linguistics. Acta S o c i e t a t i s L i n g u i s t i c a e
~ u r o p a e a e : The Hague 1967-
Forschungen und Fortschritte. B e r l i n 1925-67 [= 41
v o l s ; suspended between 1945-47, 1950-531.
GCFI GiornaZe Critico de ZZa F i Zosofia ItaZiana. Roma 19 21-
G e m n i st i k Germnistik. I n t e r n a t i o n a l e s Referatenorgan m i t
b i b l i o g r a p h i s c h e n Hinweisen. ~ i i b i n g e n1960-
GFFNS ~ o d i & j ' a kFiZozofskog Fakulteta u Novom Sadu. Annuaire
d e l a ~ a c u l t 6d e s L e t t r e s e t S c i e n c e s 5 Novi Sad.
Novi Sad/Yugoslavia 1958-
GGA Gijttingische GeZehrte Anzeigen. Unter d e r A u f s i c h t
d e r Akademie d e r Wissenschaften. G h t i n g e n 1739
[sic] -
Gengo KenkyG. J o u r n a l of t h e L i n g u i s t i c S o c i e t y of
Japan. Tokyo 1939-
General Linguistics. Kentucky U n i v e r s i t y . Department
o f Modern Languages. [ S i n c e 1967: The P e n n s y l v a n i a
S t a t e University]. Lexington, Ky., l a t e r on Univer-
s i t y Park, Pa. 1955-
!l%e Germn Review. Columbia U n i v e r s i t y . Department
of Germanic Languages. New York 1926-
GRM Gemnanisch-Romanische Monatsschrift. H e i d e l b e r g 1909-
GW Germnica WratisZaviensia. Wrockaw [Bres l a u ] 1958-
HandNFC Hande Zingen van het ~ e d eZands
r F i Zo Zogencongress .
Groningen 1898-
IBK Innsbrucker Beitriige x u r KuZturwissenschuft. Sprach-
w i s s e n s c h a f t l i c h e s Seminar d e r U n i v e r s i t z t Innsbruck.
Innsbruck 1953?-
Indogermanisehe Forschungen. Z e i t s c h r i f t f i i r Indo-
g e r m a n i s t i k und a l l g e m e i n e S p r a c h w i s s e n s c h a f t .
I m A u f t r a g e d e r Indogermanischen G e s e l l s c h a f t .
[Orig. s u b t i t l e w a s : Z e i t s c h r f i t f i i r indogermanische
Sprach- und Altertumskunde]. S t r a s s b u r g , l a t e r on
B e r l i n 1891-
 Anzeiger fib indogermanische Sprach- und AZtertums-
wissenschclft. S t r a s s b u r g , l a t e r on B e r l i n 1891-
1930. [Supplement t o ---+ IF].
IJAL InternationaZ JournaZ of American Linguistics. Balti-
more, Md. 1917-39; N.S. Bloomington, I n d . 1944-
IJb Indogermanisches Jahrbueh. I m A u f t r a g e d e r Indoger-
manischen G e s e l l s c h a f t . S t r a s s b u r g , l a t e r on B e r l i n
& L e i p z i g 1914-1941 [1948].
IKE BeriuZ-K 'auk ' a s i d Enatmecniereba/.Beri js ko-Kavkazkoe
jazykoznanija. T b i l i s i 1951-
IL Indian Linguistics. J o u r n a l of t h e L i n g u i s t i c S o c i e t y
of I n d i a . Lahore, later on Poona 1931-
IRJaSZ I z v e s t i ja po russkomu jazy ku i s Zovesnosti . Moskva
1928-
IWLS InternationaZe Z e i t s c h r i f t fiir aZZgemeine Sprachwisserz-
schaft. L e i p z i g 1884-90 [= 5 v o l s . ; r e p r . Amsterdam,
19721.
Izraz Izraz. Casopis z a k n i j z e n n u i umjetnicka k r i t i k u .
S a r a j evo/Yugoslavia 1956-
IzvAN I z v e s t i j a Akademii Nauk SSSR. Otdelenije l i t e r a t u r y
i jazyka. Moskva & Leningrad 1942-
JafSb ~ a f e t i G eks i j Sbornik/RacueiZ Japhgtique. Akademi j a
Nauk SSSR. I n s t i t u t j a z y k a i m y g l e n i j a imeni
akademika N. J a . Marra. Leningrad 1922-35?
~azykovzdndAktuaZity
v
. Zpravokaj ~ a z ~ k o v ~ d n 6 h o s d r u ~ e n ? .
ph ~ e s k o s l o v e n s k 6akademii vsd. Praha 19 64-
c: Jazy kovednQ ?asopis. Brat i s l a v a 19 51-
JEGP The JournaZ of English and Germanic Phi Zo 20%. Blooming-
t o n , Ind., l a t e r on Urbana, I l l . 1897-
JournaZ of Linguistics. The L i n g u i s t i c s A s s o c i a t i o n
of G r e a t B r i t a i n . Edinburgh, l a t e r on London &
New York 1965-
Janua Linguarum. Series maior. S t u d i a memoriae N i c o l a i
van Wijk d e d i c a t a . The Hague 1962-
 xvii

JL-SMin Janua Linguarwn. Series minor. Studia . . . , etc.

The Hague' 1956-
JP Jqzyk PoZski. Organ Towarzystwa ~ i 3 0 6 n i k 6 wJqzyka
Polskiego. ~ r a k 6 w1931-
JPs JournaZ de PsychoZogie normale e t pathoZogique.
B u l l e t i n o f f i c i e l d e l a S o c i 6 t 6 de P s y c h o l o g i e de
Paris. P a r i s 19Q4- ; o f t e n a l s o a b b r e v i a t e d : JPsych.
~ u & z o~so u e n s k iF i ZoZog. Povremeni s p i s s a s l o v e n s k u
filologiju i lingvistiku. Belgrad 1913- [Sus-
pended 1914-201.
Kanazawa Daigaku Hobungakubu Ronshu. Bungakuhen
[ S t u d i e s and e s s a y s by t h e f a c u l t y of Law and
L i t e r a t u r e , Kanazawa U n i v e r s i t y : L i t e r a t u r e ] .
Kanazawa 19 53-
Kraty Zos Kraty 20s. K r i t i s c h e s B e r i c h t s - und Rezensionsorgan
fGr indogermanische und a l l g e m e i n e S p r a c h w i s s e n s c h a f t .
Wiesbaden 1956-
KSISZ Kratkie ~ o o b z z e njai Ins t i t u t a SZavjanovedeni ja.
Akademija Nauk SSSR. Moskva 1951-
KZ = ZflrSpr (Kuhn's) Z e i t s c h r i f t fiir vergzeichende Sprachforschung
auf dem Gebiete des Deutschen, Griechischen und
Luteinischen [ a f t e r 1874: ...
auf dem Gebiete
der i n d o g e m n i s c h e n Sprachen]. B e r l i n 1852-
Langages Langages. [subtitle varies]. P a r i s 1966-
Language = Lg Language. J o u r n a l of t h e L i n g u i s t i c S o c i e t y of America.
Baltimore, Md. 1925-
LAnt Linguis t i c a Antverpiensia. Antwerpen 196 7-
LB Leuvensche Bijdragen op het gebied van de Germaansche
phiZoZogie i n ' t bijzonder van de NederZandsche
dialektkunde. [ L a t e r on s u b t i t l e d : T i j d s c h r i f t
voor moderne p h i l o l o g i e ] . Leuven 1896-
Ling. Berichte Linguistische Berichte. Forschung-Information-Dis-
kussion. Braunschweig 1969-
 L i d a ~ o m t n z.. B u c u r e t~i 1952-
Litterarisches CentraZbZatt. S ---+ LZ. .
Lingua e S t i l e . Quaderni d e l l t I s t i t u t o d i G l o t t o -
l o g i a d e l l ' u n i v e r s i t i i d e g l i S t u d i d i Bologna.
Bologna 1966-
c
Lexis Lexis. Studien zur Sprachphilosophie, sprachge4hichte
und B e g r i f f s f o r s c h u n g . Lahr i n Baden 1948-1955
[= 4 v o l s . I .
Listy FiZogick6 (i Paedagogick6). Praha 1874-
The Linguistic Reporter. Modern Language A s s o c i a t i o n
of America. C e n t e r f o r Applied L i n g u i s t i c s .
Washington, D.C. 1959-
Lingua Lingua. I n t e r n a t i o n a l Review of General ~ i n g u i s t i c s /
Revue i n t e r n a t i o n a l e d e L i n g u i s t i q u e g g n g r a l e .
Haarlem, l a t e r on Arns terdam 1947/48-
Linguistics ~ i n g u i s t i c s . An I n t e r n a t i o n a l Review. The Hague 1963-
L i tera Litera. S t u d i e s i n Language and L i t e r a t u r e . Published
by t h e E n g l i s h Department, I s t a n b u l U n i v e r s i t y .
I s t a n b u l 1954- ; s u p e r s e d e s ---t Dergi.
LLBA Language and Language Behavior Abstracts. Ann Arb o r ,
Mich. 1967-
Linguistik und Didaktik. Miinchen 19 70-
Literarisches ZentraZb Zatt fiir DeutschZand. Leipzig
1850-1944. [N.B. Vol. 5 1 (1900) i s t h e f i r s t
numbered copy] .
Memnon. Z e i t s c h r i f t f u r d i e Kunst- und K u l t u r g e -
s c h i c h t e des a l t e n Orients. L e i p z i g 1907-15
[- 7 v o l s . 1.
MKNA W- L Medede ( e )Zingen van de Konink Z i jke ~ e d elands r e Akadenrie
van Wetenschappen. A f d e l i n g L e t t e r k u n d e ( S e r i e s
A & B). Amsterdam 1855- ; Nieuwe Reeks 1938-
MLJ Modem Language Journal. N a t i o n a l F e d e r a t i o n of Modern
Language Teachers A s s o c i a t i o n . Menasha, Wisc.,
l a t e r on Ann Arbor, Mich. 1916-
 xix

PhPrag = PhP PhiZoZogica Pragensia. [Formerly c a l l e d : PhiZoZogica].

Prague 1958- ; s . a l s o ---+ v
CMF.
Phi Zo Zogische Wochenschrift, B e r l i n & L e i p z i g 1881-
1944. Vols. 4-40 (1884-1920) a s ---+ BPhWs.
Poradnik J g x y k m y . Warszawa 1901- ; N.S. 1948-
[Suspended 1917-181.
PLG Prob Zeme de ~ i n ~ v i s t i ~c ez n e r a ~ z Bucures
. t i 1963-
PMLA PubZications of the Modern Language Association o f
America. B a l t i m o r e , l a t e r on Menasha, Wisc., and
f i n a l l y New York 1884-
PWS = PhWs (BerZiner) Phi Zo Zogische Wochenschrift . Berlin &
L e i p z i g 1880-1944 [= 64 v o l s . ] [N.B.: d u r i n g 1884-
19 20 t h e j o u r n a l appeared as ---t BPhWs. 1.
RBF Revista BrasiZiera d i ~iZoZog<a. R ~ Od e J a n e i r o 1955-
RBPH Revue Be Zge de Phi20 Zogie e t d 'Hist o i r e . Belgisch
T i j d s c h r i f t voor F i l o l o g i e en Geschiedenes.
[Earlier subtitle: La S o c i 6 t 6 pour l e p r o g r & s d e s
6tudes philologues e t h i s t o i r e s ] . B r u x e l l e s 1922-
RCeZt Revue CeZtique. P a r i s 1870-19 34.
RCHL Revue CKtique d'Histoire e t de ~ i t t z r a t u r e . P a r i s
1866-1875 [Suspended 1870-711; c o n t i n u e d 1876-1935.
REA Revue des Etudes Anciennes. Bordeaux & P a r i s 1897-
REL Revue des Etudes k t i n e s . P a r i s 1922-
RF Rivista d i FiZoZogia CZassica. Torino 1872- [N.B.
The 'Nuova S e r i e ' i s e n t i t l e d ---+RFIC].
RFHC Revista de Za FacuZtad de Hmanidades y Ciencias.
Montevideo 1944-
RFV Russkij ~iZoZogizeskij Vestnik. v a r z a v a [Warsaw I
1878-79-1917 [= 77 v o l s . 1.
RIL Rendiconti deZZ1lntituto Lombardo d i Scienze e Lettere.
Classe d i l e t t e r e e scienze morali e p o l i t i c h e .
Milano 1864-67; N.S. 1868-
RILA Rass egna Ita Ziana d i Linguis t i c a App Zicata . Roma
1969-
MNY Magyar NyeZu. [ O r i g i n a l l y : KiilGleuyomat a ...]
Budapest 1905-
M N e~Zvzr Magyar N y e ~ v & . [Hungarian P u r i s t ] .
Budapest 1872-
Monatshefte Monatshefte fiir deutschen Unterricht. A J o u r n a l devoted
t o t h e Study of German Language and L i t e r a t u r e .
Madison, Wisc. 1899-
MorphUnters MorphoZogische Untersuchungen. (By Hermann Osthoff
and Karl Brugmann). L e i p z i g 1878-1910 [ = 6 v o l s . ] .
MPh Modern PhiZoZogy. A J o u r n a l devoted t o Research i n
Medieval and Modern L i t e r a t u r e . Chicago 1903-
MSLL [Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y ] Monograph Series on Language
and Linguistics. Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y , Washington,
D.C. 1951-
MSLP Me'moires de Za Socie'td de Linguistique de Paris.
P a r i s 1868-1935.
Moderna spr;k. T i d s k r i f t f o r s p r ~ k u n d e r v i s i n g . Malm;,
l a t e r on Stockholm 1907-
NAA Narody A z i i i A f r i k i . I s t o r i j a , 2konomika, k u l ' t u r a .
Moskva 1959-
NAR North American R e v i m . New York 1815-1940; N.S. C o r n e l l
C o l l e g e , Mount Vernon, Iowa 1964-
NDV~-F Nau&zye DokZady vys;ej SkoZy. ~ i l o l o ~ i ~ e s nkaiuek i .
Moskva 1958-
Nye Zutudom6ny: K8zZenQnyek. S . ---+ NyK.
Neophi Zo Zogus. A Modern Language Q u a r t e r l y . [Sub-
t i t l e s v a r y ; s i n c e 1966: A Q u a r t e r l y Devoted t o
t h e Study of t h e Modern Languages and T h e i r L i t e r a -
t u r e s and t h e C l a s s i c a l Languages and L i t e r a t u r e s
i n s o f a r as t h e y b e a r t o t h e f o r m e r ( ! ) ] . Groningen
1916-
NeuphiZoZogische MitteiZungen. B u l l e t i n de la Socigtd
ngophilologique d e Helsinki. [Helsingfors =]
H e l s i n k i 1899-
 xxi

Die Neueren Sprachen. Z e i t s c h r i f t f i r den neusprach-

l i c h e n U n t e r r i c h t [ l a t e r on s u b t i t l e d : Z e i t s c h r i f t
f 5 r Erforschung und U n t e r r i c h t a u f dem G e b i e t e d e r
modernen Fremdsprachen] . Marburg 1893-1943 [= 5 1
vols.]; supersedes * PhonSt. N.S. F r a n k f u r t -
~ e r l i n - ~ o n n - M i n c h e n1951-
NTF Nordis k Tidss k r i f t for F i ZoZogi. Kdb enhavn 1861-19 22.
NT9 De Nieme TaaZgids. Tweenmaandelijksch t i j d s c h r i f t .
Groningen 1907-
NTS Nors k Tidsskrif t for Sprogvidenskap. Oslo 1 928-
NTTS Nordisk T i d s s k r i f t for Tale og Stemme. Kdbenhavn 1936-
NYK NyeZvtudomiEnyi KijzZenZnyek. A Magyar ~ u d o d n y o sAkadgmia
nyelvtudo&nyi b i z o t t s s g $ n a k megbiz&Gb61. Budapest
1862- [Suspended 1944-471.
OGK Onsei Gakkai Kaiho. The B u l l e t i n of t h e P h o n e t i c
S o c i e t y of Japan. Tokyo 1926-
Paideia Paideia. R i v i s t a l e t t e r a r i a d i informazione b i b l i o -
grafica. Arona-Brescia-Genova- e t c . / I t a l y 1946-
PAPA Proceedings of the American Phi Zo ZogicaZ Association.
H a r t f o r d , t h e n Middletown, Conn. l a t e r on I t h a c a ,
N.Y. 1871- ; s . a l s o --+ TAPA.
PBB ( P a u l und Braunes) BeitrEge z m Geschichte der deutschen
Sprache und Literatur. H a l l e 1874-1954, a f t e r 1955:
There a r e two p a r a l l e l e d i t i o n s p u b l i s h e d i n H a l l e
and Tiib i n g e n .
PBML The Prague B u l l e t i n of MathemticaZ Linguistics.
Prague 1963-
Phi Zo Zogica PhiZoZogica. J o u r n a l of Comparative P h i l o l o g y . London,
Philological Society. London 1921-24 [= 2 v o l s . ] .
Phi ZoS t Philosophische Studien. L e i p z i g 1883-1903 [= 20 v o l s . ] .
Phone ti ca . Phonetica. I n t e r n a t i o n a l e Z e i t s c h r i f t fiir Phonetik/
I n t e r n a t i o n a l J o u r n a l of P h o n e t i c s / J o u r n a l i n t e r -
n a t i o n a l d e phongtique. Base1 & New York 1957-
RIS Revue de Z 'Inst i t u t de Socio Zogie. B r u x e l l e s 19 28-
RJG Russkij Jazyk v .?koZe. Moskva 1936-
RJb Romanistisches Jahrbuch. U n i v e r s i t g t Hamburg, Seminar
f i i r romanische Sprachen. Hamburg 1947/48-
Rozprmy Komisji Jqzykowej. Wrocitawskie Towarzystwo
Naukowe. Wrockaw 1960-
Revue des Langues Romanes. Montpellier ( l a t e r also)
P a r i s 1870-
RLaV = TLT Revue des Langues Vivantes/Tijdschrift voor Levende
TaZen. Fondation u n i v e r s i t a i r e d e Belgique.
B r u x e l l e s 1932-
RLB RecueiZ Linguistique de Bratis Zava. B r a t i s l a v a 1948-
RLPC Revue de Linguistique e t de PhiZoZogie Conpar~e.
P a r i s 1867-1916.
RLR Revue de Linguistique Romane. ~ o c i 6 t 6d e L i n g u i s t i q u e
romane. S t r a s b o u r g , l a t e r on Lyon & P a r i s 1925-
Romania Romania. R e c u e i l t r i m e s t r i e l consacrg 2 1' 6 t u d e des
l a n g u e s e t d e s l i t t g r a t u r e s romanes. P a r i s 1872-
RPH Romance PhiZoZogy . Berkeley & Los Angeles, C a l i f .
1946/7-
RPhiZos = RPFE Revue PhiZosophique de Za France e t de Z'Etranger.
P a r i s 1876-
Revue Romne de Linguistique. [= C o n t i n u a t i o n of ---t

RLing], B u c a r e s t 1956-
RS Zav Ricerche SZavistiche. Roma 19 53-
RUM Revista de Za Universidad de Madrid. Madrid 1940-
Sas SZovo a SZovesnost. Praha 1935-
%SAW Sitzungsberichte der Sdchsischen Akademie der Wissen-
schaften zu Leipzig. Philologisch-historische
Klasse. B e r l i n 1919- [Supersedes ---t B(KISGWL1.
Scientia Seientia. R i v i s t a d i Scienzia. Bologna 1907- [Vols.
1907-09 appeared a s ' R i v i s t a d i S c i e n z i a ' ] .
SGL S t u d i i p i C e r c e t z g Linguis t i c e . t i 19 50-
Bucure~
 xxiii

Strumenti C r i t i e i . Torino 1966/67-

Semiotics. 3 o u r n a l of t h e I n t e r n a t i o n a l A s s o c i a t i o n
f o r Semiotic Studies. The Hague 1969-
S o r n i k F i Zozofickej FakuZty ~rn&skZ Univerzity .
Eada ~ a z ~ k o v z d n g .Brno 1953-
Studiwn GeneraZe. Z e i t s c h r i f t fiir d i e Einheit d e r
W i s s e n s c h a f t e n i m Zusammenhang i h r e r B e g r i f f s b i l d u n g e n
und Forschungsmethoden. B e r l i n & New York 1947-
Studia Linguistics. Revue d e l a l i n g u i s t i q u e g g n g r a l e
e t compar6e. Lund 1947-
SZEEJ SZavic and East European JoumaZ. Madison, Wisc.
1957-
Studia NeophiZoZogica. A J o u r n a l of Germanic & Romanic
philology. Uppsala 1927-28-
Sprache Sprache. Z e i t s c h r i f t f G r Sprachwissenschaf t . Wiener
Sprachgesellschaft . Wien & Wiesbaden 1949-
SSI = ISS SociaZ Science Information/Infomation sur Zes sciences
sociaZes. Amsterdam 1962-
SSL Studi e Saggi Linguistiei. Supplemento a l l a r e v i s t a
"L' I t a l i a D i a l e t t a l e " . P i s a 1961-
StGen StucZiwn GeneraZe. S. ---+ SG.
StGram = Stud. Studia Grammatica. A r b e i t s s t e l l e S t r u k t u r e l l e Grarmnatik.
Gramatica Deutsche Akademie d e r Wissenschaften zu B e r l i n .
B e r l i n 1962-
StwliiBaZtiei Studii BaZtici. Roma 1931-
STZ Sprache i m technischen ZeitaZter. S t u t t g a r t 1961-
TA La Traduction Automatique. B u l l e t i n t r i m e s t r i e l d e
l l A s s o c i a t i o n pour 1 1 6 t u d e et l e dgveloppement
de l a t r a d u c t i o n automatique e t d e l a l i n g u i s t i q u e
appliqug (Atala). La Haye & P a r i s 1960-64 [= 5 v o l s . ] .
TAPA Transactions (and Proceedings) of the American PhiZo-
ZogicaZ Association. H a r t f o r d , t h e n Middletown,
Conn., l a t e r on I t h a c a , N.Y. 1871- ; s. a l s o ---+ PAPA.
 xxiv

TCLC Travam du CercZe Linguistique de Copenhague . Copen-

hague 1944- [ I r r e g . ] .
TCLP Travaux du Cercle Linguistique de ~ r a ~ u e / ~ r a z s k f
~ i n v i s t i c k f ~ r o u z e k . PragueIPraha 19 29-39 [= 8 vols .
TempsModernes Les Temps Modernes. P a r i s 1945- ; s u p e r s e d e s 'Nouvelle
Revue f r a n c a i s e ' .
Teuthonis t a Teuthonista. Z e i t s c h r i f t f u r deutsche Dialektforschung

TIJa
und Sprachgeschichte.

Trudy Ins t i t u t a Jazykoznani ja.

-
L e i p z i g & Bonn 1924125-1934
s u p e r s e d e s ---+ ZfDMa; superseded by
Moskva, Akademij a
ZflaF.

Nauk SSSR. Moskva 1952-

TIL Travaux de Z ' I n s t i t u t de Linguistique. F a c u l t 6 des
L e t t r e s de l ' U n i v e r s i t 6 de P a r i s . P a r i s 1956-
TLL T~avauxde Linguistique e t de Littdrature. Publi6
p a r l e Centre de P h i l o l o g i e e t de ~ i t t g r a t u r e s
romanes de l ' u n i v e r s i t g de S t r a s b o u r g . St r a s b o u r g
196 3-
TLP Travaux Linguistiques de Prague. Prague & Alabama/
U.S.A. 1964-
TPS = TPhS Transactions of the PhiZoZogicaZ Society. Oxford
1854- [Supersedes -+ PPS 1.
Universitas Universitas. Z e i t s c h r i f t fir Wissenschaft, Kunst und
Literatur. S t u t t g a r t 1946-
Uzeney Zapis k i ~ a z k i rkogo s gosudars tvennego Univer-
s i t e t a . S e r i j a f i l o l o g i z e s k i x nauk. Ufa/uSSR 1956-
Uzenye Zapisky I n s t i t u t a Jazyka i Literatury. Moskva
1926-
( I z v e s t ija i) &enye Zapis k i imperators kogo Kazanskogo
Universiteta. S e c t i o n " ~ Z e n y eZapiski". Kazan'
1834-1861; 1862-4 [ d i v i d e d i n t o s e c t i o n s ] ; 1865-83
[S. a l s o ---t I K U ] ; 1884-1917. N.S. ' ~ z e n y eZ a p i s k i
Kazanskogo U n i v e r s i t e t a imeni V. I. Ul'janova-
Lenina'. a i d . 1961-
 &enye Zapiski f o ~ o Z o ~ i ~ e s kfakutteta,
o~o Kirgizski j
gosudzrst@ennyj Universitet. Frunze 1952-
UZKU See ---+ UZKazU,
VeZtro IZ VeZtro. R e v i s t a d e l l a c i v i l t a i t a l i a n a . (Societa
Dante A l g h i e r i ) . Roma 1957-
Verri IZ Verri. Rivista d i Letteratura. Milano 1944-
V F i 20s Voprosy FiZosofii. I n s i t u t f i l o s o f ii, Akademija Nauk/
SSSR. Moskva 1947-
VJa Voprosy Jazykoznanija. Moskva 1951/52-
VMU Vestnik Mos kovs kogo gosudms tvennogo Universiteta.
Serija V I I : Filologija. Moskva 1946-
vox Vox. I n t e r n a t i o n a l e s Z e n t r a l b l a t t fiir experimentelle
P h o n e t i k [ S i n c e 1925 s u b t i t l e d : 'Mitteilungen aus
dem p h o n e t i s c h e n Laboratorium d e r U n i v e r s i t g t Ham-
burg']. B e r l i n 1891-1936; s u p e r s e d e d by -+ AfGPhon.
VR Vox Romanica. Annales h e l v e t i c i e x p l o r a n d i s l i n g u i s
romanicis d e s t i n a t i . Bern 1936-
VsW h i 20s VierteZ jahrsschri f t fiir wissenschaf t Ziche Phi Zosophie
und SozioZogie. L e i p z i g 1876-1916 [= 40 v o l s . ] .
Word Word. J o u r n a l of t h e L i n g u i s t i c C i r c l e of New York.
New York 1945-
WSZav Die WeZt der SZaven. V i e r t e l j a h r s s c h r i f t fiir S l a v i s t i k .
Wiesbaden 1956-
WuS Wijrter und Sachen. K u l t u r h i s t o r i s c h e Z e i t s c h r i f t fiir
Sprach- und Sachforschung . H e i d e l b e r g 1909-1943.
WW Wirkendes Wort. Deutsches Sprachschaf f en i n Lehre und
Leben. [ S u b t i t l e d s i n c e 1969: Deutsche Sprache i n
Forschung und L e h r e ] . Diisseldorf 1950-
wzm Wiener Z e i t s c h r i f t fiir die Kunde des MorgenZandes.
Wien 1897-1917/18 [= 30 v o l s . 1.
WZUB WissenschaftZiche Z e i t s c h r i f t der HwnboZdt-Universitat
BerZin. G e s e l l s c h a f t s - und s p r a c h w i s s e n s c h a f t l i c h e
Reihe. B e r l i n 1951152-
WZUG Wissenschaft Ziche Z e i t s c h r i f t cler Ernst Moritz Amdt-
~ n i v e r s i t & GreifswaZd. G e s e l l s c h a f t s - und s p r a c h -
wissenschaf t l i c h e Reihe. G r e i f s w a l d 1952-
WZUH Wissenschaft Ziche Zeitschri f t der Martin Luther-Univer-
s i t z t HaZZe-Wittenberg. G e s e l l s c h a f t s - und s p r a c h -
w i s s e n s c h a f t l i c h e Reihe. H a l l e 1951152-
WZUJ WissenschaftZiche Z s i t s c h r i f t der Friedrich SchiZZer-
~ n i v e r s i t %Jena. G e s e l l s c h a f t s - und Sprachwissen-
s c h a f t l i c h e Reihe. Jena l95l/52.
WZUL WissenschaftZiche Z e i t s c h r i f t der Karl Marx-UniversitGt
Leipzig. G e s e l l s c h a f ts- und sprachwissenschaf t l i c h e
Reihe. L e i p z i g 19 54-
ZAA Z e i t s c h r i f t f i Ang Z i s t i k und Amerikanistik. VEB
Deutscher V e r l a g d e r Wissenschaften. B e r l i n 1952153-
ZbFiL - ZbFL Zbornik za FiZoZogiju i Lingvistiku. Matica s r p s k a .
Knj i z e v n o o d e l j e n j e. Lingvistika sekcija. Novi
Sad/Yugoslavia 19 57-
ZDL Z e i t s c h r i f t f& DiaZektoZogie und Linguistik. Wiesbaden
1969 -
ZDMG Z e i t s c h r i f t der Deutschen MorgenZEndischen GeseZZschaft.
Wiesbaden 1847-
Z f D P = ZDPh Z e i t s c h r i f t fiir deutsche Phi Zo Zogie . H a l l e , l a t e r on
B e r l i n 1869-
ZPU Z e i t s c h r i f t fiir den deutschen Unterricht. Berlin &
L e i p z i g 1887-1919.
Z (N)FSL Z e i t s c h r i f t fiir neufranz5sische ( s i n c e v o l . 11 [I889 ] :
... fiir franzijsischel Sprache und Literatur.
Wiesbaden 1879- [Suspended 1945-551.
Z e i t s c h r i f t fiir vergZeichen.de Sprachforschung auf dem
Gebiete des Deutschen, Lateinischen und Griechischen
[ S i n c e 1876: . . . auf dem Gebiete der indogermanisehen
Sprachen]. B e r l i n 1852- [Suspended 1945-471.
Absorbed ---+ BVSpr ( i n 1 8 7 6 ) , and ---+ BB ( v o l . 30,
1907). F r e q u e n t l y r e f e r r e d t o a s ---+ K Z .
 xxvii

ZfVPs Zeitschri f t fiir VijZkerpsychoZogie und Sprachwissen-

schaft. Berlin 1860-90 [= 30 v o l s . I .
ZNKUL Zeszyty flaukowe KatoZockiego Universytetu Lubeskiego.
L u b l i n 1958-
ZPhi Zos F Z e i t s c h r i f t fib phiZosophische Forschung. Wurzachl
Germany l a t e r on MeisenheimIGlan ( S w i t z e r l a n d )
1947-
ZPhon Z e i t s c h r i f t fiir Phonetik und AZZgemeine S p a c h i s s e n -
schaft. B e r l i n & Hannover 1947-1960; superseded
by -+ ZPSK.
ZPSK Zeitschrift fb Phonetik, Sprachwissenschaft und
Kornmunikationsforschung. B e r l i n 19 61- ; s u p e r s e d e s
.--+ ZPhon.
ZRP = ZRPh Z e i t s c h r i f t fiir romanische PhiZoZogie. Halle, l a t e r
on ~ i i b i n g e n1877- ( a l s o r e f e r r e d t o a s "GrEber's
Zeitschrift") .
Z e i t s c h r i f t fib S Z m i s t i k . B e r l i n 19 56-
v
Zurna Z Ministers t v a flarodnogo ~rosvegGeni
ja. St.
P e t e r s b u r g (S. P e t e r b u r g ) 1846-1905; N. S. 1906-17?
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS FOR FESTSCHRIFTEN, COLLECTIONS OF ARTICLES BY
VARIOUS AUTHORS, AND PROCEEDINGS OF LINGUISTIC AND OTHER RELEVANT
CONGRESSES OR CONFERENCES.

Actes du Premier Congr2s International de

Linguistes. [The Hague, A p r i l 10-15,
19281. Leiden: A. W. S i j t h o f f , n.d.
[1930], v i i i + 198 pp.
A[2] CIL Actes du Dexdme Congrzs International de
Linguistes. [Geneva, August 25-29,
19311. P a r i s : A. Maisonneuve, 1933,
254 pp.
A t t i d i Terzo Congresso InternazionaZe dei
Linguisti. [Rome, September 19-26,
19331. Ed. by Bruno M i g l i o r i n i and
Vittore Pisani. F l o r e n c e : F. Lemonnier,
1935, xv + 449 pp.
Actes du Quatri2me Congrzs International
de Linguistes. [Copenhagen, August 27-
September 1, 19361. Copenhagen: E.
Munksgaard, 1938, 305 pp.
[The Congress planned t o t a k e p l a c e i n
B r u s s e l s , August 28-September 2 , 1939,
was n o t h e l d b e c a u s e of t h e d e t e r i o r a t i o n
of t h e international s i t u a t i o n . However,
t h e f o l l o w i n g p r e l i m i n a r y m a t e r i a l was
p u b l i s h e d i n Brugge: Impr. S a i n t e Cathe-
r i n e , 1939 : 1 ) ~ 6 p o n s e sau Question-
m i r e , 104 pp. 2) Supplement t o I),
53 pp. 3) Rapports, 147 pp., and 4)
R~swn& des Comunications, 66 pp. I .
 xxix

Actes du Sixizme Congre's I n t e r n a t i o n a Z des

I

[sic. ] Linguistes. [ P a r i s , J u l y 19-24>

19481. Ed. by Michel Lejeune. Paris:
C. K l i n c k s i e c k , 1949, l x x i + 608 pp.
See ---+ P [7,8,9 IICL.
A c t e s du Dixieme Congres I n t e r n a t i o n a Z d e s
Linguistes. [ B u c h a r e s t , August 28-
September 2, 19671. 4 vols. Bucharest:
Ed. d e l f A c a d . d e l a RSR, 1969-70.
(Actes du) Gnxie'me Cong?es I n t e m t i o n a Z d e
PsychoZogie ( P a r i s , 25-31 j u i Z Z e t 1937) :
R q p o r t s e t comptes r e n d u s . Ed. by
H [ e n r i ] ~ i g r o n ,and I [ g n a c e ] Meyerson.
Agen: Impr. Moderne, 1938, 571 pp.
A c t e s du Premier Congrzs I n t e r n a t i o n a Z
des S c i e n c e s P h o n s t i q u e s . F i r s t Meeting
of t h e I n t e r n a t i o n a l e Arbeitsgemeins chaf t
f i i r Phonologie. [Amsterdam, J u l y 3-8,
19321. (= ANPE, 8-9). The Hague:
Association ngerlandaise des Sciences
phon6tiques , 19 33.
A[2]CISP See ---+ P[2]ICPS.
A [3]CISP Actes du ~roisizrneCongr& I n t e r n a t i o n a z
des Sciences ~ h o n g t i q u e s . [Ghent , J u l y
18-22, 19381. Ed. by Edgard B l a n c q u a e r t
and W i l l e m Pee. Ghent: Univ. L a b o r a t o r y
of P h o n e t i c s , 1939, x i + 536 pp.
A[4,5]CISP See ---+ P[4, 51ICPS.
A Zbm Baader AZbm phiZoZogicwn voor Prof. D r . !?h[ e o d o r ]
Baader. Ed. by C [ o r n e l i s ] c [ h r i st i a a n ]
Berg, e t a l . T i l b u r g / ~ o l l a n d : Redaction
Album Baader, 1939, x i i + 224 pp.
B Zoomfie Zd Antho Zogy A Leonard BZoomfieZd Anthology. Ed. by
Charles F [ r a n c i s ] Hockett. Bloomington
 & London : I n d i a n a Univ. P r e s s , 19 70,
' x x i x 4- 553 pp.
Current Trends 111 Current Trends i n Linguistics. Vol. 111:
TheoreticaZ Foundations. Ed. by Thomas
A [ l b e r t ] Sebeok. The Hague: Mouton,
1966, x i + 537 pp.
EncycZopaedia of Linguistics EneycZopaedia of Linguistics, Information
and Control. Ed. by A [ l f r e d ] R[oger]
Meetham and R [ i c h a r d ] A[nthony] Hudson.
Oxford & London: Pergamon P r e s s , 1969,
xiv + 718 pp.
Ferdinand de Saussure (l857-lgl3). Ed. by
Marie d e S a u s s u r e . Geneva: W. ~ i i n d i g ,
1915; 2nd e d . , p r e p a r e d by J a c q u e s and
Raymond d e S a u s s u r e . Morges: Impr.
F. Trabaud, 1962, 95 pp.
Fes tschr. Meinhof Festschrift [Carl] Meinhof. Hamburg:
F r i e d r i c h s e n , 1927, x i i + 514 pp.
Festschr. Meyer-Liibke I , I1 Prinzipienfragen der romanischen Sprach-
wissenschaft: Withe l m Meyer-Liibke z w
Feier der VoZZendung seines 50. Lehr-
semesters und seines 50. Lebensjahres
gmidmet. 2 v o l s . H a l l e l S . : M. Niemeyer,
19 10-11.
Festschr . Steinitz BeitrEge zur Sprachwissenschaft, VoZkskunde
und Literatmforschung: Wolfgang S t e i n i t z
zwn 60. Geburtstag . . . dargebracht.
Ed. A [ l e k s a n d r ] V [ a s i l 1 e v i ; ] Isazenko,
Wilhelm Wissmann,et a l . B e r l i n : Akad.
V e r l a g , 1965, 455 pp.
Festschr . Streitberg Stand und Aufgaben der Spracbissenschaft:
Festschrift fiir WiZheZm Streitberg zwn ...
60. Geburtstag. Ed. by J [ o h a n n ] B [ a p t i s t ]
Hofmann, e t a l . Heidelberg: C. W i n t e r ,
1924, x i x + 683 pp.
 xxxi

Festschr. v. Wartburg I F e s t s c h r i f t WaZther von Wartbulg zum 80.

I

Gebwtstag. Ed. by Kurt B a l d i n g e r ,

v o l . I. Tiibingen: M. Niemeyer, 1968,
718 pp.
For Roman Jakobson For Roman Jakobson: Essays on the Occasion
of His S i x t i e t h Birthday (22 October
1956). Comp . by M o r r i s H a l l e , Horace
G[ray] Lunt, e t a l . The Hague: Mouton:
1956, x i i + 681 pp.
Geneva School Reader A Geneva SchooZ Reader i n Linguistics.
Ed. by R o b e r t Godel. Bloomington, I n d .
& London: I n d i a n a Univ. P r e s s , 1969,
viii + 3 6 1 pp.
Homage Buyssens Linguistique contemporaine: H o m g e c? Eric
Buyssens. Ed. by J e a n D i e r c k x [ s i c . ]
and Yvan Lebrun. B r u s s e l s : Ed. d e 1'
I n s t . d e S o c i o l o g i e , 1970, 287 pp.
Hugo Schuchardt-Brevier Hugo Schuchardt-Brevier: Ein Vademecum der
aZZgemeinen Sprachwissenschaft. Compiled
and ed. by Leo S p i t z e r , 2nd e n l . ed.
H a l l e : M. Niemeyer, 1928, 483 pp.
Jazyk i myglenie Jazyk i r g g ~ e n i e . Comp. by F [ e d o r ] ~ [ e t r o v i z ]
F i l i n , S [ t e p a n ] G [ r i g o r ' e v i z ] Barxudarov,
e t a1. Moscow: I z d . " ~ a u k a " , 1967, 312 pp.
Le Langage Le Langage. (= C o l l e c t i o n d e l ' ~ n c ~ c l o ~ & d i e
de l a ~ l g i a d e ) . Comp. by ~ n d r 6M a r t i n e t .
P a r i s : G a l l i m a r d , 1968, xv + 1 , 5 2 5 pp.
La Linguis tique La ~ i n g u i s t i q u e :Guide aZphabgtique . Comp .
by ~ n d r 6 M a r t i n e t , e t a l . P a r i s : Ed.
Denosl, 1969, 490 pp .
M& Zanges Ba 2 Zy ~e'Zangesde Zinguis tique o f f e r t s h B a r Zes
BaZZy sous Zes auspices de Za ~ a c u Z t 6
des Lettres de Z 'UniversitZ de Genzve ...
Geneva: Georg & Cie., 1939, x i i + 515 pp.

~dZangesPetrovici
M$Zanges Saussure
M$Zanges Van Ginneken
Misee Z6nea Martinet I , I I
0b;Gee jazykoznanie
Omagiu Gram
Omagiu Iordan
Omagiu R o s e t t i
xxxii
MzZanges Zinguis tiques o f f e r t s h EZni Z
Petrovici p a r ses amis Gtrangers 2
Z 'occasion de son soixanti2me anni-
versaire. Bucharest: Ed. d e 1'Acad.
d e l a RPR, n.d. [1962?], 527 pp.
~6Zangesde Zinguistique o f f e r t s h M.
Ferdznand de Saussure. ( = C o l l e c t i o n
L i n g u i s t i q u e p u b l i g e p a r l a SLP, 2 ) .
P a r i s : H. Champion, 1908, 325 pp.
~6Zangesde Zinguistique e t de phi l o Zogie
o f f e r t s h Jacq[ues] van Ginneken h Z '
occasion du soixanti2me anniversaire
de sa naissance. P a r i s : C. K l i n c k s i e c k ,
1937, li + 364 pp.
is ce Z&ea Homenaje a ~ n d r zMartinet:
EstructuraZismo e h i s t o r i a . Ed. by
Diego ~ a t a l z nMenendez P i d a l . 2 vols.
~ e n e r i f f e l c a n a r y : Univ. d e La Laguna,
1957-58.
0b;Gee jazy koznanie: Fornty s$zes tuovanija,
funkcii, i s t o r ija jazy ka. Comp by
. .
B[oris] A[leksandrovic] Serebrennikov.
Moscow: I z d . "Nauka", 1970, 604 pp.
Omagiu Zui AZ [exandru] Gram, cu p r i ZejuZ
ZmpZinirii a 60 de ani. (= SCL 11:
307-838) . B u c h a r e s t : Ed. Acad. RPR,
1960, 532 pp.
Omagiu Zui Iorgu Iordun, cu priZejuZ
f n p l i n i r i i a 70 de ani. B u c h a r e s t :
Ed. Acad. RPR, 1958, x x v i i + 946 pp.
Omagiu Zui AZexandru ~ o s e t t iZa 70 de ani.
Comp. by I o r g u I o r d a n , Andrei Avram,
et al. Bucharest: Ed. Acad. RSR, 1965
[1966], x x i x 9 1,049 pp.
 xxxiii

PhonoZogie der Gegemart PhonoZogie der Gegemart: Vortrzge und

' Dis kussionen an ZZss Zich der Internationalen
Phono Zogie-Yagung i n Wien, 30. VIII. -
3. I X . 1966. Ed. by J o s e f H a m . Graz-
Vienna-Cologne: H. BGhlau, 1967, 391 pp.
Phonometrie I,II,III Phonometrie. [Sub t i t l e v a r i e s 1. Ed. by
Eb e r h a r d Zwirner and Kennosuke Ezawa.
Vols. 1-111. Base1 & New York: S. Karger,
1966-69.
Proceedings of the Seventh InternationaZ
Congress of Linguists. [London, September
1-6, 19521. Ed. by F r r e d e r i c k ] Norman
and P e t e r F [ e l i x ] Ganz. London: I n t e r -
n a t i o n a l Univ. B o o k s e l l e r s ( T i t u s Wilson
& Son), 1956, l x x i i + 575 pp.
Proceedings of the Eighth International
Congress of ~ i n g u i s t s . [Oslo, August
5-9, 19571. Ed. by Eva S i v e r t s e n .
Oslo: Oslo Univ. P r e s s , 1958, x x x i +
885 pp.
Proceedings of the Ninth International
Congress of Linguists. [Cambridge, Mass.,
August 27-31, 19621. (= JL-SMai, 12).
Ed. by Horace G[ray] Lunt. The Hague:
Mouton, 1964, x x i i + 1,174 pp.
Proceedings of the Second International
Congress of Phonetic Sciences. [London,
J u l y 22-26, 19351. Ed. by D a n i e l J o n e s
and Dennis B [ u t l e r ] Fry. Cambridge:
Cambridge Univ. P r e s s , 1936, 328 pp.
Proceedings of the Fourth International
Congress o f Phonetic Sciences. [Helsinki,
September 4-9, 19611. (= JL-SMai, 1 0 ) .
Ed. by A n t t i ~ o v i j i r v iand P e n t t i A a l t o .
The Hague: Mouton, 1962, x x i x + 825 pp.

portraits of Linguists I , I1
Prague Schoo Z Reader
rob Zem der Sprache
ProbZemas y principios
Prob Zemy jazy koznani ja
Reader i n 19th c . Ling.
xxxiv
Proceedings of the F i f t h IntemationaZ
I Congress of Phonetic Sciences. [Miins t e r ,
August 16-22, 19641. Ed. by Eberhard
Zwirner and Wolfgang Bethge. Base1 &
New York: S. Karger, 1965, x x v i i i + 632 pp.
Portraits of Linguists : A BiographicaZ
Source Book for the History of Western
Linguistics, 1746-2963. Ed. by Thomas
A [ l b e r t ] Sebeok. 2 vols. Bloomington
& London: I n d i a n a Univ. P r e s ~ ,1966.
A Prague SchooZ Reader i n Linguistics.
Ed. by J o s e f Vachek. Bloomington:
I n d i a n a Univ. P r e s s , 1964, x + 485 pp.
Das Prob Zem der Sprache: 8. deutscher
Kongress fiir PhiZosophie. Ed. by Hans-
Georg Gadamer. Munich: W. F i n k , 1967,
566 pp.
ProbZemas y principios deZ estructuraZismo
Zing-iiistico. (= P u b l i c a c i d n e s d e l a
R e v i s t a d e ~ i l o l o g i ae s p a z o l a ) . Madrid:
Imp. Aguire, 1967, 319 pp.
Frob Zemy jaxykoznani ja: DokZady i soob-
;Zen< ja sovets k i x uGenyx nu X ~egdunarod-
nom Kongress e Zingvis t i k o v . Comp by .
F [ e d o r ] ~ [ e t r o v i z ]F i l i n , e t a l . Moscow:
I z d . "Nauka", 1967, 285 pp.
~6sum6sdes Communications : ~ i x i 2 m e~ o n g r z s
International des Linguistes. [Bucharest,
August 28-September 2 , 19671. Bucharest:
no p u b l . , 1967, 440 pp.
A Reader i n nineteenth-Century HistoricaZ
Indo-European Linguistics. Ed. and
t r a n s l . by Winfred P [ h i l i p p ] Lehmann.
Bloomington & London: I n d i a n a Univ.
P r e s s , 1967, v i + 266 pp.
 Readings i n Linguistics I: The Develop-
'
ment of Descriptive Linguistics i n
America 1925-56. [ l s t e d . , 19571.
4 t h ed. , ed. by M a r t i n J o o s . Chicago
6 London: The Univ. of Chicago P r e s s ,
1966, v i i + 421 pp. (in-4').
R i L I1 Readings i n Linguistics I I . Ed. by E r i c
P [ r a t t ] Hamp, Fred W [ a l t e r ] Householder,
and Robert A u s t e r l i t z . B i d . , 1966,
x + 395 pp.
Semiotika i vost. jaz. Senriotika i vosto&zye jaxyki. Comp. by
Ju[ruj] V[ladimirovir] ~ o g d e s t v e n s k i j .
Moscow: I z d . "Nauka", 1967, 312 pp.
Sprache der Gegenwart V Sprache - Gegenwart und Geschichte: ProbZeme
der Synchronic und Diachronic . (= Sp r a c h e
d e r Gegenwart , 5) . Ed. by Hugo Moser i n
c o l l a b o r a t i o n w i t h Hans Eggers, et a l .
Diisseldorf: Schwann, 1969, 250 pp.
Teoret. prob Zemy jazyk. ~ e o r e t i ; e sk i e prob Zerny sovremennogo sovet-
skogo jazykoznani ja. Comp . by V[iktor]
~ [ l a d i m i r o v i ~Vinogradov.
] Moscow: I z d .
"Nauka", 1964, 160 pp.
To Honor Roman Jakobson To Honor Romn Jakobson: Essays Presented
I , 11, I11 on the Occasion of His Seventieth Birthday.
(= JL-SMai, 31-33) 3 vols .
The Hague: .
Mouton, 1967, x x x i i i + 2,464 pp.
Trends I Trends i n Modern Linguistics: On the Occasion
of the Ninth InternationaZ Congress of
Linguists ...
. Ed. by C h r i s t i n e
Mohrmann, Alf Sommerfelt, and F [ r e d e r i c k ]
Norman. U t r e c h t & Antwerp: Spectrum,
1961, 118 pp.
Trends I1 Trends i n European and American Linguistics
1930-1960: On the Occasion , etc. ...

Verba e t Vocabula
Verh. Dial. Kongr. I , I1
Vopr. ob;;. jazy koznani ja
Zeichen & System
Ed. by C h r i s t i n e Mohrmann, Alf Sonnnerfelt,
' and Joshua Whatmough. B i d . , 1963, 299 pp.
Verba e t VocabuZa: Ernst GamiZZscheg zum 80.
Geburtstag daxgebracht von KO Z Zegen,
Freunden und SchiiZern. Ed. by Helmut
Stimm and J u l i u s Wilhelm. Munich:
W. F i n k , 1968, 670 pp.
VerhandZungen des m e i t e n Internationalen
DiaZektoZogenkongress .
Ed. by Ludwig
Erich Schmitt. 2 vols. Wiesbaden:
F. S t e i n e r , 1967-68.
Voprosy obg;ego jazykoznani ja. Comp . by
V[iktor] ~[aksimovi;] Zinnunskij. Moscow:
I z d . "Nauka", 1964, 129 pp.
Zeichen und Sys tem der Sprache : verijffent-
Zichung des 1. [and 2. ] Internationalen
Symposions "Zeichen und System der
Sprache" ... . Comp. by Georg F [ r i e d -
r i c h ] Meier. 3 vols. B e r l i n : Akad.
V e r l a g , 1961-66.
 FURTHER ABBREVIATIONS AND SIGLA USED I N THIS STUDY

Acad./Accad. Academia, Acadgmie, Academy, etc./Accademia

Akad . Akademia, Akademija, Akademie, e t c .
Am. American
AN Akademija Nauk, Akademia Nauk, e t c .
Aspects Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. By Noam Chomsky .
Cambridge, Mass.: M.I.T. P r e s s , 1965 [ r e p r .
19691, x + 251 pp.
BdC [ J a n ] Baudouin d e Courtenay
Bibl. ~ i b l i o t s q u e ,B i b l i o t h e k , B i b l i o t e c a , e t c .
cf. confer : "compare "
CLG Corns de Linguistique GZn6raZe. Ed. by C h a r l e s
B a l l y and A l b e r t Sechehaye. P a r i s & Lausanne:
Payot, 1916; r e f . a r e t o t h e 3rd and f o l l o w i n g
e d i t i o n s , 331 pp.
CLG (E) Cours de Linguistique G&&aZe. Edition c r i t i q u e
p a r Rudolf E n g l e r , v o l . I. Wiesbaden: 0 .
H a r r a s s o w i t z , 1968, x + 515 pp. [ d o u b l e ] .
coll. column/columns
comp./comps. compiled, c o m p i l e r / c o m p i l e r s
Corns Corns de Linguistique GbnbraZe; s. CLG
Cz . Czech
Y

AV ~ e s k o s l o v e n s k e Akademie
' Ved. Prague.
Dan. Danish
diss. dissertation
doc t . doctoral [dissertation]
Du. Dutch
English
Editor(s), Editeur(s), Editore(s), etc.

xxxvi i
ed. / e d s . edition, editor, edited [by]/editors
en1 . enlarged [ e d i t i o n ]
EPHE Ecole P r a t i q u e des Hautes Etudes. Paris.
esp. especially
et a l . e t aZi?: "and o t h e r s "
fasc . fascicle(s), fascicule(s)
FdS Ferdinand d e S a u s s u r e
Fr . French
G. German
gosud . g o s u d a r s t v e n n y j , gosudarstvennoe, e t c .
Hung. Hungarian
idg . indogermanisch; s . a l s o I E
IE Indo-European
Inst . Institute, Institut, etc.
introd. introduced, introduction
It. Italian
izd. izdatel'stvo
Jap . Japanese
LGL Life and Growth of Language: An OutZine of
Linguistic Science. By William Dwight Whitney
New York: D. Appleton; London: H. S. King,
1875; l a t e s t r e p r . , 1901, i x + 327 pp.
LGLF Linguistique GZnZraZe e t Linguistique Fran~aise.
By C h a r l e s B a l l y , 2nd r e v . ed. Berne: A.
Francke, 1944; 4 t h ed., p r e p a r e d by S i e g f r i e d
Heinimann, ibid., 1965, 440 pp.
LHLG 1/11 Linguistique Historique e t Linguistique G6n6raZe.
By Antoine M e i l l e t . P a r i s : C. Klincksieck,
v o l . I (1921 [new ed., 19651); v o l . I1 (1936
[repr . 19521) .
Lib r . Library, L i b r a i r i e , e t c .
LSA L i n g u i s t i c S o c i e t y of America. Washington, D.C.
LSL Language and the S t u d y of Language: TueZue
Lectures on the Principles of Linguistic
 Seience. New York: S c r i b n e r , Armstrong & Co.;
~ o i d o n : Triibner, 1867 ; 3 r d e d . , augmented by
a n a n a l y s i s [pp. 475-901, 1870, x i + 505 pp.
LTS Lexique de Za Termino Zogie Sausswienne. Comp .
by Rudolf E n g l e r . U t r e c h t & Antwerp: Spectrum,
1968, 57 pp.
ms./mss. manuscript/manuscripts
N.S. New S e r i e s , Nova S e r i e , Neue S e r i e , e t c .
OSG Omskring Sprogteoriens GrundZaeggeZse. By
Louis Hjelmslev. Copenhagen: E. Munksgaard,
1943; 2nd ed. Copenhagen: Akad. F o r l a g , 1966,
112 pp. S. a l s o PTL.
P * IPP* pagelpages
PAN P o l s k a Akademia Nauk. Warsaw.
PiL Papers i n Linguistics, l 9 3 4 - l 9 5 l . By J [ohn]
R[upert] Firth. London: Oxford Univ. P r e s s ,
1957 [ r e p r . 19641 , x i i + 233 pp.
Pol. Polish
PTL ProZegomena t o a !Theory of Language. By Louis
Hjelrnslev (= E. t r a n s l . of OSG by F r a n c i s J.
Whitfield). 2nd rev. ed. Madison: Univ. of
Wisconsin P r e s s , 1961, 144 pp.
publ. pub l i s h e d l p u b l i s h e r
PUF P r e s s e s U n i v e r s i t a i r e s d e France. Paris.
PWN Pa& twowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe. Warsaw.
ref. refer(s), reference(s)
repr . reprinted, reprint
res. r6sum6, r6sum6s
rev. r e v i s ed
RPRIRSR R e p u b l i c i i P o p u l a r e / S o c i a l i s t e Ro&nia
Rum. Rumanian
Rus s . Russian
s. see
SLP ~ o c i 6 t 6d e L i n g u i s t i q u e d e P a r i s . Paris.
 Les Sources Manuscrites du CLG de FdS. Ed. by
~ o b k r Godel.
t Geneva: L i b r . Droz; P a r i s :
Ed. Minard, 1957; 2nd p r i n t i n g , 1969, 282 pp.
Span. Spanish
SW I Selected Writings, v o l . I : PhonoZogica Z S t u d i e s .
By Roman Jakobson, 2nd expanded ed. The Hague:
Mouton, 1971 [ l s t e d . , 19621, x -I- 775 pp.
TBL ~ i i b i n g e rB e i t r i g e z u r L i n g u i s t i k . Tcbingen 1969 -
transl. translated, translation
Univ . University, u n i v e r s i t g , U n i v e r s i t g t , Universidad,
etc.
La V<e du Zangage. (= ~ i b l i o t h z q u es c i e n t i f i q u e
internationale, 14). By William Dwight Whitney.
P a r i s : L i b r . G. ~ a i l l i z r e ,1875; 3rd ed.,
1880, v i i + 264 pp.
volume/volumes

A d d e n d a :

ADB Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie. B e r l i n 1875-1912

[Repr. B e r l i n : Duncker &Humblot, 1 9 6 7 f f . l .
NDB Neue Deutsche Biographie. B e r l i n : Duncker &
Humblot, 1953 -
0.0 INTRODUCTION: OUTLINE OF THE GOAL OF THE INVESTIGATION

... mehr a l s die schwierigste Rech-

nung, d i e m i t HiiZfe a l t e r Operationen
ausgefiihrt wird, bedeutet d i e Ermitt-
lung einer neuen Operationsart.
Hugo Schuchardt i n 1905 (ZRPh 29: 622)

I n h i s programmatic a r t i c l e of 1938, "The H i s t o r i o g r a p h y of Ideas",

Arthur 0. Lovejoy (1873-1962) l i s t e d a dozen d i s c i p l i n e s i n which t h e
h i s t o r i c a l s t u d y of i d e a s h a s b e e n pursued, among them t h e h i s t o r i e s of
philosophy, s c i e n c e , p o l i t i c a l economy, and s o c i o l o g y as w e l l a s comparative
1
l i t e r a t u r e and t h e h i s t o r y of a r t . It i s r e g r e t t a b l e t o n o t e t h a t Lovejoy
made no mention of l i n g u i s t i c s except f o r a r e f e r e n c e t o "some p a r t s of
2
t h e h i s t o r y of language, e s p e c i a l l y semantics", a s t a t e m e n t which would
s u g g e s t t h e a u t h o r ' s u n f a m i l i a r i t y w i t h t h e s u b j e c t a s a whole, a n i m -
p r e s s i o n which i s r e i n f o r c e d by t h e a b s e n c e of any f u r t h e r a l l u s i o n t o
t h i s a r e a of s c h o l a r l y a c t i v i t y i n t h e remainder of h i s argument. While
w e b e l i e v e t h a t t h i s omission of t h e g e n e r a l s t u d y of language from t h e
f i e l d o f r e s e a r c h devoted t o t h e development of human t h o u g h t , c u l t u r e
o r s o c i o - p o l i t i c a l s e t t i n g w i t h i n a g i v e n p e r i o d , does n o t r e p r e s e n t
an i s o l a t e d case - on t h e c o n t r a r y , i t a p p e a r s t h a t f o r a t l e a s t o n e
h u n d r e d - a n d - f i f t y y e a r s p h i l o l o g i c a l s t u d i e s and t h o s e d e a l i n g w i t h t h e
i n v e s t i g a t i o n of language h a v e tended t o d i v e r g e from each o t h e r t o t h e i r
mutual d e t r i m e n t -, o u r concern i s n o t w i t h d i s s e c t i n g t h e v a r i o u s r e a s o n s
f o r t h i s n e g l e c t b u t w i t h t r y i n g t o make o u r own p o s i t i o n c l e a r and t o
s u g g e s t a program which i s more s a t i s f a c t o r y .
We a r e convinced t h a t t h e h i s t o r y of l i n g u i s t i c s a s such ( i n c o n t r a s t
t o t h e h i s t o r i c a l s t u d y of i s o l a t e d ( c a t c h ) words, a s Lovejoy s u g g e s t e d )
r e p r e s e n t s t h e f i e l d w i t h i n t h e h i s t o r i o g r a p h y of i d e a s par excezzence
and could perhaps t a k e p r i d e of p l a c e . It h a s been m a i n t a i n e d t h a t
1
etymology, f o r example, does n o t r e v e a l v e r y much about a p e o p l e ' s way
of t h i n k i n g i n a g e n e r a l s e n s e , ' a l t h o u g h t h e r e may w e l l b e s t r i k i n g i n -
s t a n c e s t o b e d i s c o v e r e d i n which a s i n g l e word form may y i e l d a whole
concept of t h o u g h t ; nor do we b e l i e v e t h a t t h e h i s t o r y of philosophy f o r
i n s t a n c e can p r o v i d e an a d e q u a t e p i c t u r e of t h e main t r a i t s of i n t e l l e c t u a l
a c t i v i t y of a g i v e n epoch u n l e s s i t i s a l s o concerned w i t h contemporary
o p i n i o n s a b o u t language.
I t i s a common-place s t a t e m e n t t o a f f i r m t h a t language i s t h e most
i m p o r t a n t t o o l of man; i n c o n t r a s t t o t h i s t h e f a c t t h a t language i s
n o t o n l y t h e c a r r i e r of o u r c u l t u r a l h e r i t a g e b u t e q u a l l y w e l l t h e b e s t
p o s s i b l e a c c e s s t o t h e r e s u l t s of t h e human mind h a s n o t been accorded
comparable c o n s i d e r a t i o n . It i s our c o n v i c t i o n t h a t human r e f l e c t i o n
upon t h i s t o o l of s e l f - e x p r e s s i o n and s o c i a l i n t e r c o u r s e a s i t h a s b e e n
t r a n s m i t t e d t o u s through w r i t i n g (which i n i t s e l f c o n s t i t u t e s t h e f i r s t
means o f s y n t h e s i s ) i s a most i m p o r t a n t s o u r c e of i n f o r m a t i o n , t o t h e
e x t e n t t h a t a h i s t o r i o g r a p h y of i d e a s h a s t o b e b a s e d on a l l primary
documents which c o n t a i n , i n a s y s t e m a t i c manner o r n o t , views about l a n -
guage, i t s f u n c t i o n and mechanism.
To a c h i e v e such a p r e l i m i n a r y g o a l of i n v e s t i g a t i n g o r i g i n a l s o u r c e s
f o r t h e p u r p o s e of p r e s e n t i n g a s y n t h e s i s of t h e g e n e r a l t r e n d s of t h o u g h t
i n a g i v e n e r a of t h e c u l t u r a l , p o l i t i c a l and economic development of
mankind i s c e r t a i n l y no e a s y t a s k f o r a s i n g l e s t u d e n t even i f h e d e c i d e s
t o l i m i t h i m s e l f t o a r e s t r i c t e d p e r i o d and g e o g r a p h i c a l a r e a . Lovejoy
s u g g e s t e d t h e f o l l o w i n g means of d i m i n i s h i n g t h e d i f f i c u l t i e s : 1) the
p r e p a r a t i o n o f s c h o l a r s f o r competent i n v e s t i g a t i o n i n more t h a n one
f i e l d (which is a d m i t t e d l y t h e c o n d i c i o s i n e qua non); 2) t h e r e d i s c e r n -
ment o f p e r c u s s i o n s of c e r t a i n i d e a s o u t s i d e t h e g i v e n a r e a of s t u d y ;
3
and 3) c l o s e c o l l a b o r a t i o n between a l l t h e b r a n c h e s of h i s t o r i o g r a p h y .
While nobody would s e r i o u s l y q u e s t i o n t h e v a l i d i t y of t h e s e s u g g e s t i o n s
t h e s i m p l e f a c t remains t h a t s i n c e t h e n nowhere, t o our knowledge, h a s
t h e r e b e e n e s t a b l i s h e d a department o r i n s t i t u t e i n which t h e s e n e c e s s a r y
s k i l l s are t a u g h t , n o r does i t seem l i k e l y t h a t c o l l a b o r a t i o n between
h i s t o r i a n s of philosophy, s o c i o l o g y o r any o t h e r d i s c i p l i n e i s t o become
something q u i t e normal i n t h e n e a r f u t u r e w i t h i n t h e h u m a n i t i e s ; t h e
p u b l i c a t i o n s i n t h e JournaZ of the History of Ideas which h a v e appeared
4
s i n c e 1940 seem t o s u p p o r t t h i s impression. This r e g r e t t a b l e rGsum6 of
t h e ' s t a t e of t h e a r t ' i s c e r t a i n l y n o t v e r y encouraging, and t h e s t e p
from d i a g n o s i s t o t h e r a p y i s probably much b i g g e r t h a n i n medicine f o r
i n s t a n c e s i n c e t h e o b j e c t of remedy i s n o t of a p h y s i c a l b u t o f an a b s t r a c t
and m e n t a l n a t u r e and probably much more p e r s i s t e n t i n c h a r a c t e r .
It a p p e a r s t o u s t h a t what i s l a c k i n g i s n o t s o much i n t e l l e c t u a l
f l e x i b i l i t y among s c h o l a r s and a w i l l i n g n e s s t o c o o p e r a t e i n an e n t e r -
p r i s e s u c h as t h e i n v e s t i g a t i o n of g e n e r a l t r e n d s i n human thought a s
some k i n d of guidance, d i r e c t i o n a l markers, s o t o speak, which s a f e g u a r d
t h e s e a r c h e r i n t h e terra incognita a g a i n s t l o s i n g h i s way. There i s
a n abundance o f primary m a t e r i a l a v a i l a b l e t o anyone w i l l i n g t o v e n t u r e
on s u c h a journey of human c u r i o s i t y . I n s h o r t , what i s s t i l l m i s s i n g ,
i n p a r t i c u l a r i n t h e f i e l d of t h e h i s t o r y o f l i n g u i s t i c thought, i s a
5
frame o f r e f e r e n c e , a t h e o r y .
B e f o r e a t t e m p t i n g an o u t l i n e of t h e n a t u r e and c o n t e n t of such a
t h e o r y , i t seems i n d i s p e n s a b l e t o j u s t i f y o u r c l a i m t h a t t h e h i s t o r y of
l i n g u i s t i c s does c o n s t i t u t e t h a t b r a n c h of t h e h i s t o r y of i d e a s i n a
manner u n e q u a l l e d by any o t h e r d i s c i p l i n e . We have a l r e a d y p o i n t e d t o
t h e s i m p l e t r u t h t h a t language i s t h e human means of e x p r e s s i o n katexochh
and, a t t h e same t i m e , t h e b e s t medium f o r t h e t r a n s m i s s i o n of c u l t u r a l
v a l u e s through i t s w r i t t e n d e r i v a t i v e . Another e q u a l l y i m p o r t a n t f e a t u r e
sezms less g e n e r a l l y a c c e p t e d and r e q u i r e s i l l u s t r a t i o n . It is our claim
t h a t l i n g u i s t i c thought o r , more a d e q u a t e l y , t h e a n a l y s i s of t h e o r i g i n
and n a t u r e of language i s c l o s e l y r e l a t e d t o t h e g e n e r a l c u l t u r a l and
s o c i o - p o l i t i c a l atmosphere, t h e i n t e l l e c t u a l paradigm, of i t s time.
I n f a c t , we b e l i e v e t h a t i d e a s and o p i n i o n s about language r e f l e c t , t o a
l a r g e e x t e n t , what a g i v e n s o c i e t y o r c u l t u r a l community r e g a r d a s t h e
most s i g n i f i c a n t achievements of i t s epoch. J. P. ~ i i s s m i l c h ' s t r e a t i s e
of 1756, i n which h e a t t e m p t e d t o prove h i s c o n v i c t i o n t h a t t h e p e r f e c t i o n
and o r g a n i s a t i o n of language could o n l y b e "the work of a v e r y g r e a t and
p e r f e c t mind", and H e r d e r ' s famous AbhandZung iiber den Ursprung der Sprache
( B e r l i n 1772), i n which t h e a u t h o r deduced from t h e i n t e l l e c t u a l i n g e n u i t y
6
("Besonnenheit") of man t h e n e c 6 s s i t y of language and i t s development,
may b e c i t e d a s examples of c o n t r a s t i n g views r e g a r d i n g t h e o r i g i n of l a n -
guage and, a t t h e same t i m e , a s r e v e a l i n g i n s t a n c e s of t h e paradigm of
Western European thought i n t h e second h a l f of t h e 1 8 t h c e n t u r y . On t h e
o t h e r hand, we may a l s o understand why C u v i e r ' s voluminous work on com-
p a r a t i v e anatomy which appeared a f t e r 1817 s h o u l d h a v e g i v e n r i s e t o a
number of s u g g e s t i o n s concerning t h e s t r u c t u r e of language and t h e means
of d e s c r i b i n g i t a s t h e work of G r i m m , Bopp, and o t h e r contemporary l i n -
g u i s t s demonstrate. S i m i l a r l y L y e l l ' s Principles of Geology of t h e e a r l y
1830s provided 19 t h c e n t u r y l i n g u i s t s w i t h m e t h o d o l o g i c a l p r i n c i p l e s
encouraging them t o e x p l a i n e a r l i e r and no l o n g e r v e r i f i a b l e changes of
language w i t h t h e h e l p of f o r c e s s t i l l a c t i v e i n t h e languages spoken
i n t h e i r own time.' t4uch h a s b e e n s a i d about S c h l e i c h e r ' s " ~ a r w i n i s m "
f o r i n s t a n c e ; t h e r e i t e r a t i o n of t h e r e c e i v e d o p i n i o n , however, does n o t
change t h e fable convenue i n t o a s t a t e m e n t of f a c t . Yet i t i s t r u e t h a t
S c h l e i c h e r h a i l e d Darwin when t h e Origin of Species of 1859 appeared i n
German t r a n s l a t i o n i n t h e subsequent y e a r . But, a s J. P.,Maher h a s
r e c e n t l y shownY8 S c h l e i c h e r viewed i n Darwin a k i n d r e d s p i r i t o n l y a f t e r
most of S c h l e i c h e r ' s t h e o r e t i c a l credo had b e e n developed i n a f a s h i o n
s i m i l a r t o t h e p r i n c i p l e s of e v o l u t i o n o u t l i n e d i n Darwin's work, which
i n f a c t was n o t w i t h o u t i t s a n t e c e d e n t s as Wilhelm S c h e r e r n o t e d a l m o s t
9
one hundred y e a r s ago. We a r e t h e r e f o r e much more s a f e i n s a y i n g t h a t
t h e s e i d e a s were ' i n t h e a i r ' a t t h e t i m e and t h a t b o t h were i n f l u e n c e d
by t h e n a t u r e of t h e c u r r e n t paradigm. Darwin was ( a s was mutatis mutandis
S c h l e i c h e r i n l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y ) i n t h e f i n a l a n a l y s i s r e a l l y n o t h i n g more
t h a n a s y n t h e s i z e r and p o p u l a r i z e r of i d e a s p r e v a i l i n g i n t h e n a t u r a l
s c i e n c e s of h i s time, and t h e work of t h e l i n g u i s t s of t h e same p e r i o d
e x h i b i t s much o f t h e s e i d e a s and p r i n c i p l e s a s can b e demonstrated i n
10
t h e work of Whitney o r Hermann P a u l .
However, n o t o n l y a r e achievements of t h e n a t u r a l s c i e n c e s p a r t l y
absorbed and many of t h e i r u n d e r l y i n g concepts r e f l e c t e d i n t h e l i n g u i s t i c
methodology and t h e o r i e s of t h e time b u t a l s o t h o s e of t h e s o c i a l s c i e n c e s ,
/
i n p a r t i c u l a r psychology, s o c i o l o g y o r philosophy, as c a n b e shown i n t h e
work of 1 9 t h c e n t u r y i n v e s t i g a t b r s of language, e.g. Steinthal's adaption
of H e r b a r t i a n psychology, Whitney's emphasis on t h e s o c i a l n a t u r e of
language d e r i v i n g i t s i n s i g h t s from S p e n c e r i a n s o c i o l o g y ( c f . T e r r a c i n i ,
1949 :120) o r Kantian i n f l u e n c e s on Humboldt 's l i n g u i s t i c t h o u g h t . l1 m e
impact of H e g e l ' s system of philosophy f o r example needs re-assessment;
t h a t h i s philosophy was v e r y i n f l u e n t i a l d u r i n g t h e 1 9 t h c e n t u r y i s n o t
o n l y m a n i f e s t e d i n t h e u s e K a r l Marx made of h i s t h e o r i e s b u t a l s o f o r
i n s t a n c e i n t h e l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y of August S c h l e i c h e r a s was c o n v i n c i n g l y
demonstrated by Delbriick i n h i s EinZeitung of 1880. l2 m e r e is, f o r
example, H e g e l ' s voluminous Wissenschaft der Logik which a p p e a r e d i n
1812-16, l3 and which was t r a n s l a t e d i n t o French i n 1859. l4 we mention
t h i s p u b l i c a t i o n s i n c e we hope l a t e r on t o d e m o n s t r a t e t h a t t h e r e i s a
l i k e l i h o o d t h a t Hegel a n t i c i p a t e d S a u s s u r e ' s i d e a s c o n c e r n i n g q u e s t i o n s
of o p p o s i t i o n , n e g a t i v e , d i f f e r e n c e s , and i d e n t i t y i n language ( c f . 2.2.5.1).
It a p p e a r s a l s o q u i t e l i k e l y t h a t S a u s s u r e , l i k e many o t h e r i n t e l l e c t u a l s
of h i s time, was w e l l a c q u a i n t e d w i t h H e g e l ' s EncycZopEdie of 1817 which
r a n through two f u r t h e r e d i t i o n s d u r i n g t h e a u t h o r ' s l i f e t i m e (1827 and
1830) and was f r e q u e n t l y r e - e d i t e d t h e r e a f t e r . l5 The r e - i s s u e of t h i s
i n f l u e n t i a l volume i n 1870, t h e y e a r which i s f r e q u e n t l y i n t e r p r e t e d a s
marking t h e b e g i n n i n g of a new e r a i n l i n g u i s t i c s , may w e l l b e s i g n i -
f i c a n t f o r s e v e r a l reasons. F i r s t l y , i t s u g g e s t s a r e v i v a l of i n t e r e s t
i n H e g e l ' s s y s t e m of philosophy, a n i n t e r e s t which was c e r t a i n l y m o t i v a t e d
a l s o by n a t i o n a l i s t i c t e n d e n c i e s i n Germany o r i g i n a t i n g i n t h e R o m a n t i c i s t
movement of t h e e a r l y 1 9 t h c e n t u r y . Secondly, t h e i n v i g o r a t e d i n t e r e s t
i n H e g e l ' s a t t e m p t a t a n e n c y c l o p e d i c approach t o s c i e n c e s u g g e s t s t h e
e x i s t e n c e of a w i d e l y s p r e a d f e e l i n g of p a r a l l e l i s m between developments
i n t h e v a r i o u s b r a n c h e s of t h e s o c i a l s c i e n c e s which i n t u r n a r e matched
w i t h advances i n t h e n a t u r a l s c i e n c e s b u t probably a l s o r e i n f o r c e d by
t h e economic, s o c i a l , and p o l i t i c a l c o n d i t i o n s . Again, we hope t o b e
a b l e t o show t h a t Hegel expressed i d e a s which seem t o have f o r s t a l l e d
c o n c e p t s which we now r e g a r d a s "Saussurean" ( c f . 2.2.1).
That s o c i a l c o n d i t i o n s a s w e l l as p o l i t i c a l developments h a v e t h e i r
/
impact on advances i n a l l k i n d s of human e n t e r p r i s e i s an u n d e n i a b l e f a c t .
The h i g h r e g a r d t h e s c h o l a r o r t h e s c i e n t i s t e n j o y s w i t h i n h i s s o c i a l
environment h a s a n i m p o r t a n t in'fluence on h i s endeavours, w i t h t h e
r e s u l t t h a t w i t h i n t h e n a t i o n i n which h e f i n d s acknowledgement of h i s
work, t h e outcome of h i s work w i l l b e much g r e a t e r t h a n under l e s s
favorable conditions. The r e c o g n i t i o n of t h e i n t e l l e c t u a l i n 19 t h
c e n t u r y Germany, n o t a b l y i n P r u s s i a , - and Humboldt's i n f l u e n c e on t h e
e d u c a t i o n a l system i n t h a t c o u n t r y s i n c e 1810 s e r v e s a s a good i l l u s -
t r a t i o n of t h i s f a c t - t o g e t h e r w i t h t h e r i s e of n a t i o n a l i s m a c c o u n t
f o r t h e s t r e n g t h and, q u i t e f r e q u e n t l y , t h e pre-eminence of German s c h o l a r -
s h i p and s c i e n c e i n t h e p a s t c e n t u r y . 1 6 W e would even m a i n t a i n (and
t h i s i s something which a p p e a r s t o h a v e been overlooked i n t h e h i s t o r y of
s c i e n c e a s w e l l a s i n t h e h i s t o r y of i d e a s ) t h a t t h e f o u n d a t i o n of t h e
German empire i n 1871, t h e f i n a l achievement of n a t i o n a l u n i t y , gave
r i s e t o a c o n c e n t r a t i o n of human energy and i n d u s t r y which r e s u l t e d i n
s o c i a l , economic, and s c i e n t i f i c p r o g r e s s i n t h e f o l l o w i n g y e a r s perhaps
o n l y e q u a l l e d by t h e achievements of t h e Renaissance i n I t a l y . To conclude,
w e wish t o p o i n t o u t t h a t a l l t h e s e f a c t o r s have t o b e accounted f o r i n
w r i t i n g t h e h i s t o r y of i d e a s , and, i p s 0 facto, t h e h i s t o r y of l i n g u i s t i c
thought .
The l a t t e r c l a i m , i t a p p e a r s , needs f u r t h e r comment. It i s our
c o n v i c t i o n t h a t t h e o p i n i o n s e x p r e s s e d a b o u t t h e n a t u r e of language,
i t s o r i g i n , and i t s f u n c t i o n i n g , from a s o c i a l , b i o l o g i c a l , p h i l o s o p h i c a l
and p u r e l y l i n g u i s t i c p o i n t of view, r e f l e c t , more t h a n any o t h e r human
science, t h e i d e a s c u r r e n t a t a given period. It i s probably t r u e t o
s a y t h a t a n a p p r e c i a t i o n of t h e i n t e l l e c t u a l a s w e l l a s s c i e n t i f i c
developments of o n e ' s own t i m e r e q u i r e s c o n s i d e r a b l e s o p h i s t i c a t i o n ,
and few w i l l e v e r r e a l l y u n d e r s t a n d them; b u t i t i s a l s o t r u e t h a t s o c i e t y
as a whole, and i n t e l l e c t u a l l i f e i n p a r t i c u l a r , h a s always b e e n shaped
by a c o m p a r a t i v e l y s m a l l number of men, t h o s e who c o n s t i t u t e , whether
acknowledged o r n o t , t h e ZZite of a g i v e n s o c i e t y , a n o b s e r v a t i o n which
would seem t o j u s t i f y a s t a t e m e n t a s c r i b e d t o Alex Comfort t h a t i t i s
n o t s o much t h a t t h e g e n i u s i s ahead of h i s t i m e b u t much more t h a t most
p e o p l e a r e behind t h e i r s .
 On t h e o c c a s i o n of t h e 1968 Newberry Conference on t h e H i s t o r y of
L i n g u i s t i c s Henry M. Hoenigswald e x p r e s s e d h i s c o n v i c t i o n t h a t t h e
achievements of 1 9 t h c e n t u r y l i n g u i s t i c s h a v e t o b e r e a s s e s s e d and,
17
i n f a c t , t h e h i s t o r y of l i n g u i s t i c s ought t o b e thoroughly r e v i s e d .
Hoenigswald c r i t i c i z e d i n p a r t i c u l a r t h e g e n e r a l r e l i a n c e of " h i s t o r i a n s "
of l i n g u i s t i c s c i e n c e on e a r l i e r a c c o u n t s , from Theodor Benfey's (1809-81)
Geschichte der Sprachwissenscha f t of 1869 ,I8 D e l b r l c k 's EinZeitung of
1880 and i t s many e d i t i o n s , 1 9 Vilhelm Thornsen's overview of 1902 and i t s
v a r i o u s t r a n s l a t i o n s , 20 t o Holger P e d e r s e n ' s i n f l u e n t i a l book of 1924
and i t s 1931 E n g l i s h version,21 a t t h e expense of f i r s t - h a n d s t u d y of
22
primary s o u r c e s . However, Hoenigswald r e j e c t s , w i t h some j u s t i f i c a t i o n ,
t h e i d e a t h a t M. J o o s ' commentary i n t h e Readings of 1957 o r t h e Cahiers
Ferdinand de Saussure (Geneva 1 9 4 1 f f . ) can b e r e g a r d e d a s such s o u r c e s ;
h e i s a l s o r e s e r v e d on "another a c c e p t e d p i c t u r e " , namely t h a t t h e g e n e r a l
European h i s t o r y of t h e 1 9 t h c e n t u r y , p a r t i c u l a r l y t h e r u l e of Napoleon
and t h e e a r l y p e r i o d a f t e r h i s d e f e a t a t Waterloo, had a s i g n i f i c a n t
s h a r e i n t h e development of l i n g u i s t i c s t u d i e s . 23 I n s t e a d Hoenigswald
f a v o u r s a n a t t e m p t a t r e c a p t u r i n g t h e atmosphere i n which t h e l i n g u i s t ' s
work was done i n a g i v e n p e r i o d , t h e b e s t s o u r c e f o r which b e i n g w r i t i n g s
11e s s e n t i a l l y (though n o t always d i r e c t l y ) a u t o b i o g r a p h i c a l i n n a t u r e " .

While we b e l i e v e t h a t Hoenigswald 's s u g g e s t i o n s cannot b e f u l l y

r e j e c t e d , we wish t o m a i n t a i n t h a t autobiography, though t h i s would depend
on how t h i s autobiography h a s been w r i t t e n , can o n l y b e r e g a r d e d a s an
a d d i t i o n a l s o u r c e of i n f o r m a t i o n and n o t a primary one. Of c o u r s e ,
Hoenigswald h i m s e l f knows o n l y t o o w e l l t h a t t h e member of any g i v e n
movement t e n d s t o i n t e r p r e t h i s p r e d e c e s s o r s i n a r a t h e r s u b j e c t i v e manner
w r i t i n g t h e ' h i s t o r y ' e s s e n t i a l l y pro domo. Emrnon Bach's paper of 1965,
i n which h e p u t s forward t h e "Keplerian" view of s c i e n c e ( r e a d : l i n g u i s t i c s ) ,
a s upheld by Chomsky and h i s a d h e r e n t s , i n c o n t r a s t t o t h e " ~ a c o n i a n "
s t r u c t u r a l i s t view of t h e B l o o m f i e l d i a n t r a d i t i o n , h a s t o b e t a k e n w i t h
25
a g r a i n of s a l t ; 2 4 Chomsky's paper of t h e same y e a r , and h i s Cartesian
Linguistics of 1966, must b e s e e n a s a b o l d a t t e m p t a t s a l v a g i n g o n e ' s
own t h e o r y w i t h t h e h e l p of a r e - i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h e h i s t o r y of l i n -
26
guist i c s ;
 By c o n t r a s t w i t h Hoenigswald, a s c h o l a r who i s c e r t a i n l y w e l l aware
of t h e inadequacy of t h e manner i n which t h e h i s t o r y of l i n g u i s t i c s
h a s h i t h e r t o been w r i t t e n , b u t who g i v e s i n s u f f i c i e n t m e t h o d o l o g i c a l
g u i d e l i n e s a s t o how such a problem s h o u l d b e d e a l t w i t h i n f u t u r e ,
we wish t o emphasize t h e n e c e s s i t y of t a k i n g e x t r a - l i n g u i s t i c develop-
ments and e v e n t s of s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l n a t u r e i n t o a p p r o p r i a t e account
i n o r d e r t o e s t a b l i s h t h e g e n e r a l i n t e l l e c t u a l paradigm of a g i v e n p e r i o d .
T h i s u l t i m a t e g o a l of e s t a b l i s h i n g a h i s t o r i o g r a p h y of l i n g u i s t i c
s c i e n c e n e c e s s i t a t e s a f i r s t - h a n d knowledge of t h e " c a p i t a l of i d e a s "
(Whitehead) of t h e p e r i o d under i n v e s t i g a t i o n , i . e . a good a c q u a i n t a n c e
w i t h t h e l i t e r a t u r e of t h e t i m e i n a l l t h e f i e l d s of human a c t i v i t y
which a r e r e l e v a n t t o t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t of a g i v e n paradigm t a k i n g i n t o
account t h e g e n e r a l s o c i a l , p o l i t i c a l , and c u l t u r a l s i t u a t i o n as w e l l .
T h e r e f o r e , e s p e c i a l l y b e c a u s e t h e r e seems l i t t l e l i k e l i h o o d of c l o s e
c o o p e r a t i o n between t h e v a r i o u s b r a n c h e s of h i s t o r i c a l r e s e a r c h i n t h e
n e a r f u t u r e , an u n f o r t u n a t e s i t u a t i o n which w i l l n o t change u n l e s s t h e r e
develops a t r e n d away from s p e c i a l i z a t i o n towards a more w h o l i s t i c approach
t o t h e o b j e c t s of human c u r i o s i t y , t h e h i s t o r i o g r a p h e r w i l l b e asked t o
r e a d e x t e n s i v e l y t h e l i t e r a t u r e o u t s i d e h i s main f i e l d of i n v e s t i g a t i o n .
Even i n t h e c a s e t h a t t h e p r e v a i l i n g symptoms of s c h o l a r s h i p change
d i r e c t i o n towards a more g e n e r a l o u t l o o k , t h e h i s t o r y of l i n g u i s t i c s
f o r example c o u l d n o t b e a p p r o p r i a t e w r i t t e n by a l a r g e r "Autorenkollektiv",
a s G. H e l b i g (1970:9) h a s r e c e n t l y s u g g e s t e d , i n t h e s e n s e t h a t everybody
writes a b o u t t h e developments and p r o s p e c t s of h i s own r e s t r i c t e d f i e l d
w i t h a view t o a f i n a l c o m p i l a t i o n . Such a p r o c e d u r e can o n l y b e a d e q u a t e
i f t h e i n v e s t i g a t o r of a g i v e n epoch t a k e s i n t o account a l l t h e p r e v a i l i n g
a s p e c t s of t h e p e r i o d i n q u e s t i o n which i n one way o r a n o t h e r h a v e a c t u a l l y
i n f l u e n c e d human t h o u g h t , t h e n e x t s t e p b e i n g a n arrangement and o r g a n i -
z a t i o n of t h e a c c o u n t s of v a r i o u s epochs i n some s o r t of o r d e r , i n c l u d i n g
chronological progression.
It s h o u l d b e p o i n t e d o u t , however, t h a t chronology i s n o t n e c e s s a r i l y
a prime f a c t o r i n w r i t i n g t h e h i s t o r y of l i n g u i s t i c s ; i n t h e h i s t o r y of
i d e a s i n g e n e r a l , a s i n t h e h i s t o r y of l i n g u i s t i c thought i n p a r t i c u l a r ,
one can f r e q u e n t l y , and almost s y s t e m a t i c a l l y , n o t e an a l t e r n a t i n g p a t t e r n
 of emphasis: p e r i o d s of a g e n e r a l p r e d i l e c t i o n f o r d a t a c o l l e c t i o n and
c o m p i l a t i o n a r e g e n e r a l l y b e i n g r e p l a c e d by p e r i o d s of s t r o n g emphasis
on t h e o r y . 27 The development of 1 9 t h c e n t u r y l i n g u i s t i c s a f f o r d s an
i m p r e s s i v e p i c t u r e of t h i s k i n d of f l u c t u a t i o n , and i t i s i n t h i s s e n s e
t h a t Chomsky f o r example i s s a f e i n a r g u i n g t h a t h i s own l i n g u i s t i c
t h e o r y "is much c l o s e r t o t r a d i t i o n a l grammar" (1964: 1 1 ) .
Our p r e s e n t s t u d y r e p r e s e n t s , we hope, a f i r s t s t e p towards a
model f o r a g e n e r a l approach t o l i n g u i s t i c h i s t o r i o g r a p h y . It i s f a i r l y
l i m i t e d b o t h i n s c o p e and e x t e n s i o n of time, c o v e r i n g roughly t h e p e r i o d
between 1810 and 1910 i n Western Europe i n t h e f i r s t p a r t , and v a r i o u s
a s p e c t s of t h e development of l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y between 1910 and 1970
i n t h e second. Both p a r t s a r e mainly viewed from one s p e c i f i c a n g l e :
t h e f i r s t i s concerned w i t h mapping o u t t h e paradigm of t h e i d e a s pre-
v a i l i n g i n t h e 1 9 t h c e n t u r y and a t t e m p t s t o e s t a b l i s h t h e epistemology
, of t h e 1870s u n t i l t h e t u r n of t h e c e n t u r y i n o r d e r t o t r a c e v a r i o u s
p o s s i b l e i n f l u e n c e s on S a u s s u r e d u r i n g h i s f o r m a t i v e y e a r s ; t h e second
pursues a t r i p l e goal: 1 ) t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t of a n t e c e d e n t s of a s p e c t s
of S a u s s u r e ' s l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y , 2) a r e a s s e s s m e n t of S a u s s u r e ' s a c t u a l
l i n g u i s t i c argument (on t h e b a s i s of r e c e n t f i n d i n g s ) , and 3) a n account
of t h e development of i n f l u e n t i a l concepts f o l l o w i n g t h e p u b l i c a t i o n of
t h e Corns i n 1916.
The s e l e c t i o n of a s i n g l e p e r s o n f o r t h e o u t l i n e of t h e p r i n c i p l e s
of h i s t o r i o g r a p h y i s b o t h i n d i s p e n s a b l e and j u s t i f i e d . Indispensable
i n s o f a r a s i t i s i m p o s s i b l e f o r t h e i n d i v i d u a l r e s e a r c h e r t o account f o r
t h e l i n g u i s t i c development of a number of i m p o r t a n t s c h o l a r s of t h e
same p e r i o d , and j u s t i f i e d b e c a u s e of t h e f a c t t h a t t h e g e n i u s of Ferdinand
d e S a u s s u r e e x e m p l i f i e s t o a n overwhelming d e g r e e what P i e t e r A . Verburg
c a l l e d a s t r i k i n g example of a n almost "Copernican r e v o l u t i o n " i n t h e
28
s t u d y of language.
I n f a c t t h e r e a p p e a r s t o b e g e n e r a l agreement on a t t r i b u t i n g t o
S a u s s u r e t h e h i s t o r i c a l f a c t of h a v i n g provided l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y w i t h
a new paradigm i n t h e Kuhnian s e n s e of t h e term, w i t h t h e r e s u l t t h a t
H. Arens could s u g g e s t t h a t one may d i v i d e t h e development of l i n g u i s t i c s
i n t o a p e r i o d b e f o r e S a u s s u r e and a p e r i o d t h e r e a f t e r ( c f . Arens, 1969:
573). I n f a c t t h e Cours f u l l y ineets t h e two c r i t e r i a f o r a paradigm
as c h a r a c t e r i z e d by T. S. Kuhn i n h i s Structure of S c i e n t i f i c RevoZutions
of 1962 and which a r e s h a r e d by works such a s A r i s t o t l e l s Physica, Ptolemy's
A~magest, Newton ' s Principia, and Lavois i e r ' s Chemistry, t o mention o n l y
t h e s e few. L i k e them S a u s s u r e ' s achievement "was s u f f i c i e n t l y unprecedented
t o a t t r a c t a n enduring group of a d h e r e n t s away from competing modes of
scientific activity. Simultaneously, i t was s u f f i c i e n t l y open-ended t o
l e a v e a l l s o r t s of problems f o r t h e r e d e f i n e d p r a c t i t i o n e r s t o r e s o l v e . "

(Kuhn, 19 70 :1 0 ) .
I n o r d e r t o b e a b l e t o a d e q u a t e l y j u d g e S a u s s u r e ' s accomplishment
it w i l l be necessary t o re-establish the general "intellectosphere"
(Bursill-Hall) of h i s time. An a t t e m p t t o a s s e s s S a u s s u r e ' s a t t a i n m e n t s
i n t h e l i g h t of our p r e s e n t epistemology, something which w e a r e o n l y
t o o e a s i l y tempted t o do, would n o t o n l y do S a u s s u r e a n i n j u s t i c e b u t
a l s o d i s t o r t t h e h i s t o r i c a l p i c t u r e of t h e l a t e 1 9 t h c e n t u r y , i t s g e n e r a l
achievements (many of which s t i l l a w a i t a r e a s s e s s m e n t ) and p i t f a l l s .
P e r s o n a l l i m i t a t i o n s and r e s t r i c t i o n s b o t h of t i m e and s p a c e have o b l i g e d
u s , t o t r e a t o n l y some a s p e c t s , a l t h o u g h v e r y i m p o r t a n t ones, we b e l i e v e ,
of t h e pre-Saussurean paradigm, t o s t r e t c h t h e meaning of Kuhn's term.
I n p a r t i c u l a r , s p e c i a l a t t e n t i o n h a s been p a i d t o i d e a s i n t h e f i e l d s
of s o c i o l o g y , p o l i t i c a l economy, and psychology, a l l of which were of
g r e a t importance i n s h a p i n g t h e o p i n i o n s of t h e p e o p l e l i v i n g i n t h e
l a s t t h i r d of t h e p a s t century. Philosophy, i t a p p e a r s , was t h e n con-
s i d e r e d t o b e l e s s i m p o r t a n t , a t l e a s t by t h e m a j o r i t y of l i n g u i s t s
working between 1870 and 1900. The t u r n of t h e c e n t u r y b r o u g h t a b o u t a
change of a t t i t u d e towards p h i l o s o p h i c a l problems and a renewed emphasis
on g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c c o n c e p t i o n s . This m u t a t i o n took p l a c e n o t o n l y
i n t h e s o c i a l s c i e n c e s ( c f . 1.2.1) b u t a l s o i n t h e f i e l d of s c i e n c e ;
t h u s i t i s i m p e r a t i v e t o view Wundt's voluminous VZZkerpsychoZogie ( 1 9 0 0 f f . )
s y n o p t i c a l l y w i t h F. ~ a u t h n e r ' sKritik der Sprache (1901-2), K. Vossler's
Positivismus und IdeaZismus i n der Sprachwissenschuft (1904), t o mention
o n l y a few s i g n i f i c a n t p u b l i c a t i o n s from t h e beginning of t h e c e n t u r y ,
t o g e t h e r w i t h E i n s t e i n ' s f o r m u l a t i o n of h i s r e l a t i v i t y t h e o r y i n 1905.
 The t r a n s f o r m a t i o n of t h e paradigm c r e a t e d by t h e neogrammarians
i n t h e l a s t t h r e e decades of t h k 1 9 t h c e n t u r y by S a u s s u r e ' s t e a c h i n g s
a t t h e b e g i n n i n g of t h i s c e n t u r y w e l l d e s e r v e s t o b e c a l l e d a s c i e n t i f i c
r e v o l u t i o n i n Kuhn's d e f i n i t i o n of t h e term (1970:12) comparable t o t h e
r e v o l u t i o n of t r a d i t i o n a l d o c t r i n e s i n p h y s i c s by E i n s t e i n d u r i n g roughly
t h e same p e r i o d . We a r e i n c l i n e d t o d i s a g r e e w i t h T. A. Sebeok's con-
tentions that 1) d u r i n g t h e f i r s t h a l f of t h i s c e n t u r y "normal l i n g u i s t i c
r e s e a r c h w a s d i r e c t e d , more o r l e s s , t o t h e i t e r a t i v e a r t i c u l a t i o n of
t h o s e phenomena, t h e o r y and a p p l i c a t i o n , t h a t were i n s p i r e d by t h e
Saussurean paradigm", and 2) t h a t i t i s b e i n g r e p l a c e d by t h e Chomskyan
paradigm which began t o emerge w i t h t h e appearance of h i s Syntactic
Structures i n 1957. 29 R e s i s t a n c e among l i n g u i s t s from many q u a r t e r s t o
t h e Saussurean paradigm was g r e a t ; t h e reviews of t h e f i r s t e d i t i o n of
t h e Cows i n 1916, i n p a r t i c u l a r t h o s e by Schuchardt, M e i l l e t , and J e s p e r -
s e n , were f a r from b e i n g f a v o r a b l e t o a v a r i e t y of s u g g e s t i o n s t h a t
S a u s s u r e h a d made. A s a n i n s t a n c e of t h e o p p o s i t i o n t o d e s c r i p t i v e l i n -
g u i s t i c s w e may r e f e r t o t h e opening s t a t e m e n t i n J e s p e r s e n ' s Language
of 1922 i n which t h e g r e a t Danish s c h o l a r a f f i r m s t h a t t h e h i s t o r i c a l
approach t o language i s t h e o n l y one h e r e c o g n i z e s , a view which a p p e a r s
t o have b e e n w i d e l y s h a r e d by s c h o l a r s i n Europe u n t i l t h e 1950s, i . e .
1t
The d i s t i n c t i v e f e a t u r e of t h e s c i e n c e of language a s conceived nowadays
is i t s h i s t o r i c a l character" (s . Jespersen, 1964: 7) 30 . Apart from t h e
members of t h e "Geneva School", n o t a b l y B a l l y and Sechehaye, t h o s e of t h e
Prague and t h e Copenhagen L i n g u i s t i c C i r c l e s have t o b e s i n g l e d o u t a s
h a v i n g a s s i m i l a t e d Saussurean i d e a s from t h e l a t e 1920s onwards. From
t h e p r e s e n t p o i n t of view, t h e s e l i n g u i s t s , i n p a r t i c u l a r R. Jakobson
and N. S. Trubeckoj, Hjelmslev and ~ r h n d a l ,and a l s o a few o t h e r indepen-
d e n t s c h o l a r s , such a s I o r g u I o r d a n i n ~ u m a n i a r, e~p ~r e s e n t p r e c i s e l y
t h o s e who g a i n e d a prominent p l a c e i n t h e development of modern l i n g u i s t i c s .
A s a r u l e , however, i t a p p e a r s t h a t t h e o b s e r v a t i o n of F. Sander and
H. V o l k e l t o f some y e a r s ago h o l d s t r u e i n t h e c a s e of S a u s s u r e , namely
t h a t i t t a k e s a whole g e n e r a t i o n f o r f e r t i l e d i s p o s i t i o n s i n r e s e a r c h
32
t o b e a c c e p t e d o u t s i d e a s w e l l a s i n s i d e t h e c o u n t r y of t h e i r d i s c o v e r y .
The t r a n s l a t i o n s of t h e Cowls i n t o German ( l 9 3 l ) , R u s s i a n ( l 9 3 3 ) , and
S p a n i s h (1945) were almost with'out any immediate consequences i n t h e
development of l i n g u i s t i c s i n t h e r e s p e c t i v e c o u n t r i e s ; we b e l i e v e t h a t
p o l i t i c a l r e a s o n s , e s p e c i a l l y where Germany i s concerned, do n o t f u l l y
33
e x p l a i n t h i s phenomenon.
On t h e o t h e r hand, i f t r a n s l a t i o n s r e v e a l m a n i f e s t a t i o n s of an
i n v i g o r a t e d i n t e r e s t i n S a u s s u r e , t h e y would s u p p o r t o u r c l a i m t h a t
~ a u s s u r e ' s i d e a s a r e i n many r e s p e c t s s t i l l f a r from h a v i n g become obso-
l e t e , v i z . f o l l o w i n g t h e E n g l i s h t r a n s l a t i o n of t h e Cowls i n 1959, t h e r e
h a v e appeared P o l i s h (19 61) , I t a l i a n and Hungarian (both i n l 9 6 7 ) , Serbo-
C r o a t i a n (1969) and Swedish (1970) t r a n s l a t i o n s of t h e same work.
I n a d d i t i o n , t h e y e a r 1957 marked a new e r a i n S a u s s u r e a n l i n g u i s t i c s .
R, Godel's Sources manuserites of t h e Cowls and, f o l l o w i n g h i s s u g g e s t i o n
( c f . SM, 9 8 ) , R. E n g l e r ' s c r i t i c a l e d i t i o n (1967ff.) h a v e p r o v i d e d t h e
m a t e r i a l f o r a more a d e q u a t e re-assessment of S a u s s u r e ' s achievements,
t h e r e s u l t of which i s s t i l l n o t measurable b u t may e v e n t u a l l y g i v e new
i m p u l s e t o t h e f u r t h e r r e c e p t i o n of t h e Saussurean paradigm. Where
Chomsky's c o n t r i b u t i o n i s concerned, w e h e s i t a t e t o a t t r i b u t e t o h i s
work a p o s i t i o n comparable t o t h a t of S a u s s u r e , a l t h o u g h t h i s s t a t e m e n t
may by now a p p e a r a n a c h r o n i s t i c s i n c e t h e r e a r e many, p a r t i c u l a r l y among
h i s immediate f o l l o w e r s and a s s o c i a t e s , who s p e a k of a n o t h e r new paradigm
i n l i n g u i s t i c s . 34 G. H e l b i g h a s r e c e n t l y d i s t i n g u i s h e d between t h r e e
p h a s e s i n t h e development of t r a n s f o r m a t i o n a l - g e n e r a t i v e t h e o r y : 1)
1957-1961 which showed a c l o s e r e l a t i o n w i t h t h e procedures p u t forward
by t h e a d v o c a t e s of immediate c o n s t i t u e n t a n a l y s i s ; 2) 1962-1966 i n which
Chomsky r e c o g n i z e d t h e importance of s e m a n t i c s and t h e p r i n c i p l e of "deep
structure", and 3) s i n c e 1966 t h e a t t e m p t , now no l o n g e r d i r e c t e d by
Choasky h i m s e l f , t o develop an a d e q u a t e s e m a n t i c t h e o r y t o r e p l a c e e a r l i e r
s u g g e s t i o n s e s p e c i a l l y t h o s e f o r m u l a t e d i n t h e Aspects of 1965 (cf .
H e l b i g , 1970: 314) .35 I n f a c t , a s h a s been p o i n t e d o u t by H. G. Wittmann
(l966:83), t h e r e a p p e a r s t o b e s u f f i c i e n t e v i d e n c e from Chomsky's w r i t i n g s
t o s u p p o r t o u r c l a i m t h a t t h e second phase of Chomsky's t h e o r y was t r i g -
g e r e d by t h e appearance of t h e E n g l i s h t r a n s l a t i o n of t h e COWS i n 1959
and t h e r e f o r e owes much t o S a u s s u r e ' s work, and i t m a t t e r s n o t whether
Chomsky a g r e e s w i t h h i s i d e a s o'r opposes (what h e b e l i e v e s t o b e ) S a u s s u r e ' s
36
u n d e r s t a n d i n g of t h e n a t u r e of language. I n view of t h i s f a c t , and
t a k i n g i n t o account t h e s p e c i a l s i t u a t i o n and development of l i n g u i s t i c s
i n North America between 1925 and 1957, i t may w e l l b e asked w h e t h e r
Chomsky's work i s n o t i n i t s e s s e n c e a modified c o n t i n u a t i o n of t h e
Saussurean paradigm.
Indeed, t o d e c i d e t h i s would mean t o a s s e s s Chomsky's c o n t r i b u t i o n
t o l i n g u i s t i c s i n a manner q u i t e s i m i l a r t o our p r e s e n t s t u d y on S a u s s u r e ,
and, t h e r e f o r e , would go much beyond t h e s c o p e of t h i s work. Our main
concern which i s i n f a c t twofold i s t h e g e n e s i s of t h e S a u s s u r e a n paradigm
and i t s a c c e p t a n c e d u r i n g t h e p a s t f i v e and a h a l f decades, t h e " d i s c i -
p l i n a r y m a t r i x " (Kuhn, 1970: 182) s e t up by S a u s s u r e i n t h e Cours and
i t s l a t e r d i f f u s i o n among t h e p r a c t i t i o n e r s of l i n g u i s t i c s c i e n c e .
A f t e r h a v i n g e s t a b l i s h e d , i n a number of r e s p e c t s a t l e a s t , t h e
e v o l u t i o n of t h e Saussurean paradigm i n t h e f i r s t p a r t of t h e d i s s e r -
t a t i o n , t h e second p a r t i s d e s i g n e d t o d e l i n e a t e post-Saussurean develop-
ments. This w i l l b e done i n such a way t h a t each of t h e most i n f l u e n t i a l
c o n c e p t s of S a u s s u r e ' s d o c t r i n e r e c e i v e s s p e c i a l a t t e n t i o n ; t h i s p e r h a p s
n o t completely s a t i s f a c t o r y p r o c e d u r e i s imposed on us i n p a r t i c u l a r , a s
G. C . Lepschy (1970:43) h a s r e c e n t l y p o i n t e d o u t , by v i r t u e of t h e f a c t
t h a t S a u s s u r e ' s i n f l u e n c e on modern l i n g u i s t i c s a c t e d w i t h i n t h e "by now
t r a d i t i o n a l framework of t h e s e i s o l a t e d p o i n t s . " A s f a r a s Lepschy's
second r e a s o n i s concerned, namely t h a t "a s a t i s f a c t o r y a c c o u n t of Saus-
s u r e ' s i n t e l l e c t u a l development i s s t i l l wanting", we have s e t o u t t o
p r o v i d e a f a i r l y i n f o r m a t i v e a c c o u n t i n t h e f i r s t p a r t of o u r s t u d y .
The second p a r t of t h e s t u d y i s s u b d i v i d e d i n t o s e v e r a l s e c t i o n s each
d e a l i n g w i t h a p a r t i c u l a r a s p e c t of S a u s s u r e ' s theory.37 Although we
s h a l l t r y t o s u g g e s t how t h e s e i n d i v i d u a l components a r e i n t e r c o n n e c t e d
w i t h i n S a u s s u r e ' s system of l i n g u i s t i c argument, each i n d i v i d u a l c o n c e p t
w i l l b e t r e a t e d s e p a r a t e l y i n s o f a r a s i t i s f e a s i b l e under t h r e e d i f f e r e n t
headings: 1 ) a b r i e f d i s c u s s i o n of ( s u g g e s t e d and a c t u a l ) a n t e c e d e n t s
of t h e g i v e n Saussurean p r i n c i p l e which s e r v e s a t l e a s t two purposes:
/
( a ) i t b r i d g e s t h e two main p a r t s of t h e s t u d y through t h e h i s t o r i c a l
t r e a t m e n t of t h e g i v e n c o n c e p t , ' and (b) e x e m p l i f i e s S a u s s u r e ' s i n t e l l e c t u a l
s t r e n g t h i n t u r n i n g t o a c c o u n t i d e a s from d i v e r s i f i e d s o u r c e s i n t o a
w e l l - d e f i n e d system of l i n g u i s t i c thought; 2) Saussure's concepts w i l l
b e r e - a s s e s s e d i n t h e l i g h t of t h e work of Godel and E n g l e r , our aim
b e i n g t o e l a b o r a t e p a r t i c u l a r l y on t h o s e p o i n t s which were n o t developed
c o n s i s t e n t l y i n t h e C o w s by i t s c o m p i l e r s and which h a v e b e e n f r e q u e n t l y
i s s u e s of d e b a t e ; 3) t h e main l i n e s of t h e post-Saussurean development
of t h e concepts under d i s c u s s i o n w i l l b e t r a c e d i n European and American
l i n g u i s t i c s c h o l a r s h i p t h u s showing t h e r e l e v a n c e of Saussurean n o t i o n s
t o c r u c i a l a s p e c t s of g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y down t o t h e p r e s e n t day.
It i s i n t h i s s e n s e t h a t M. J o o s ' s t a t e m e n t of 1957, t h e y e a r of
F. d e ~ a u s s u r e ' s 1 0 0 t h a n n i v e r s a r y , t h e p u b l i c a t i o n of Godel's S o w c e s
manuscrites, and Noam Chomsky ' s S y n t a c t i c S t r u c t u r e s , s h o u l d become
l e g i t i m a t e , namely t h a t S a u s s u r e ' s c o n t r i b u t i o n i s a "whole mode of
t h o u g h t , a whole s t r u c t u r e of i n t e r e s t s and v a l u e s , w i t h i n which a l l t h e
c e n t r a l d i s c u s s i o n s of l i n g u i s t i c s remain today" (RiL I , 1 8 ) .
 FOOTNOTES - 0.0

R e f e r e n c e s a r e t o t h e volume of c o l l e c t e d p a p e r s of A r t h u r Oncken
Lovejoy, Essays i n the History of Ideas (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins P r e s s ,
1948; 3 r d p r i n t i n g , 1961), pp. 1-13.

Cf. Zoc. c i t . , 8-11 (passim).

There i s no i n d i c a t i o n t h a t t h e r e c e n t l y e s t a b l i s h e d JournaZ of
the His tory of the BehavioraZ Sciences (Brandon, Vermont, 19 65f f ) , though .
perhaps more r e s t r i c t e d i n scope, h a s l e d t o c l o s e r t i e s between t h e
v a r i o u s b r a n c h e s of i n v e s t i g a t i o n devoted t o t h e h i s t o r y of i d e a s .

For some v e r y r e c e n t s u g g e s t i o n s on t h e s u b j e c t of a h i s t o r i o g r a p h y
of l i n g u i s t i c s c i e n c e , s e e now G. L. B u r s i l l - H a l l ' s review a r t i c l e s on t h e
h i s t o r i e s of l i n g u i s t i c s of Leroy (1963), 1vi; (1965), and Robins (1967)
i n GZossa 4.2: 229-43 (19 70 [ I 9 711) and, i n p a r t i c u l a r , t h e opening s t a t e -
ments t o t h e same s c h o l a r ' s r e v i e w of Mounin (1967) i n CJL 15.2: 143-50
(1970 [ l 9 7 l ] ) .
See Johann P e t e r Siissmilch, Versuch eines Bmeises, dass d i e e r s t e
Sprache ihren Ursprung nicht vom Menschen, sondern a t t e i n vom Sch6pfer
erhaZten habe ( B e r l i n : Realschulbuchhandlung, 1766), e s p . 19-58, and
Johann G o t t f r i e d von Herder, Abhandtung iiber den Ursprung der Sprache
ed. b y Hans D i e t r i c h Irmscher ( S t u t t g a r t : Reclam, 1966), e s p . pp. 3 1 f f .
and 8 0 0 f f . , and I r m s c h e r ' s i n f o r m a t i v e e p i l o g u e , 137-75.

For f u l l r e f e r e n c e s t o t h e work of Cuvier, L y e l l , and o t h e r 1 9 t h

c e n t u r y s c i e n t i s t s we r e f e r t o P a r t I1 of E. F. K . Koerner, BibZiographia
Saussureana, 1870-1970, "Background Sources of F. d e S a u s s u r e ' s L i n g u i s t i c
Theory, 1816-191611, i n p a r t i c u l a r s e c t i o n 3.

See John P e t e r Maher, "More on t h e H i s t o r y of t h e Comparative

Method", AnthrL 8.3: 1-12 (1966) .
Cf. S c h e r e r 's q u i t e r e v e a l i n g review of W. D. Whitney 's ~ i Sprach-
e
wissenschaft t r a n s l . by J u l i u s J o l l y (Munich: Ackermann, 1874) i n Preus-
sische Jahrbikher 35: 106-11 (1875) , a t p 107. .
lo That c e r t a i n t r a i t s of Darwinism h a v e r e c e n t l y been r e v i v e d and
c r i t i c a l l y r e d e f i n e d i n some q u a r t e r s of American l i n g u i s t i c a n t h r o p o l o g y
h a s b e e n shown i n Harry S p i t i b a r d t ' s p a p e r , "Neo-Darwinian Tendencies i n
Modern L i n g u i s t i c s " , A [ l O ] C I L ; 11, 313-9 (l97O), i n p a r t i c u l a r pp. 3 l 5 f f .
 l1 Cf. Eduard Spranger, "Wilhelm von Humboldt und Kant", Kantstudien
13: 5 7 f f . (1908) ; Wilhelm S t r e i t b e r g , "Kant und d i e S p r a c h w i s s e n s c h a f t " ,
I F 26:382-422 (1910), and E r n s t C a s s i r e r , "Die Kantschen Elemente i n
Wilhelm von Humboldts Sprachphilosophie", Festschrift f& Paul HenseZ
(Greiz i. V. : Ohag, l 9 2 3 ) , 105-27; f o r o t h e r p h i l o s o p h i c a l i n f l u e n c e s on
Humboldt s e e Karl-Heinz Weimann, "Vorstufen d e r S p r a c h p h i l o s o p h i e Humboldts
b e i Bacon und Locke", ZDPh 84: 498-508 (1965) .
l2 See Einleitung i n das Sprachstudiwn (Leipzig: B r e i t k o p f 6 H z r t e l ,
1880), 40-42. A c u r s o r y r e a d i n g of t h e c h a p t e r on Hegel i n B e r t r a n d
R u s s e l l ' s History of Western PhiZosophy (New York: Simon & S c h u s t e r ,
1 9 4 5 ) , 730-46, i n p a r t i c u l a r pp. 731-3, s u g g e s t s a s t r i k i n g p a r a l l e l
w i t h H e g e l ' s concept of t h e "whole" a s a complex system of r e l a t i o n s and
i d e a s i n which language was r e g a r d e d a s ( a t times a l i v i n g ) organism,
a view which l a t e r on gave r i s e t o t h e i d e a of language a s a system of
i n t e r d e p e n d e n t elements.

l3 New ed., Hamburg: F. Meiner, 1966-67, 2 v o l s .

l4La Zogique de Hegel, 2 v o l s . ( P a r i s : Ladrange, 1859) ; t h e t r a n s -

l a t o r , Augusto ~ 6 r a(1813-85), had e a r l i e r p u b l i s h e d a n Introduction h
Za philosophie de HegeZ ( P a r i s : A. Franck, 1855) of more t h a n 300 pp.
l5Encyc lopiidie der phi losophischen Wissenschafte i m Grundriss e
(Heidelberg: A. Osswald, 1817) ; 6 t h ed., p r e p a r e d by Friedhelm N i c o l a i
and O t t o PCggeler (Hamburg: F. Meiner, 1959).

l6 Cf. W. D . Whitney's c l o s i n g remarks on German l i n g u i s t i c s c h o l a r -

s h i p i n h i s L i f e and Growth of Language (New York: Appleton; London:
King, 1875), 318-9, and a l s o A . M e i l l e t ' s a r t i c l e of 1923, "Ce que l a
l i n g u i s t i q u e d o i t aux s a v a n t s allemands", r e p r . i n LHLG 11, 152-9, e s p .
pp. 1 5 6 f f .

l7 See h i s p a p e r , " F a l l a c i e s i n t h e H i s t o r y of L i n g u i s t i c s : Notes

on t h e A p p r a i s a l of t h e N i n e t e e n t h Century", t o appear i n Studies i n
the History of Linguistics ed. by D e l l Hymes (Bloomington: I n d i a n a Univ.
P r e s s , 1971).

l8 Benf ey, Geschichte der Sprachwissenschaft und ooientaZischen

PhiZoZogie i n DeutschZand, s e i t dem Anfange des 29. Jahrhunderts m~Ct
einem REckbZick auf die friiheren Zeiten (Munich: J. G. C o t t a , 1869; r e p r .
New York: Johnson, l 9 6 5 ) , x + 837 pp.

l9 Delbriick, Einleitung i n das Sprachstudiwn: Ein Beitrag z u r Ge-

schichte und Methodik der vergleichenden Sprachforschung (Leipzig: B r e i t k o p f
& H z r t e l , 1880); 2nd e d . , 1884; 3rd ed. 1893; 4 t h , much r e v i s e d and e n l .
ed. under t h e t i t l e EinZeitung i n das Studiwn der indogermnischen Sprachen
( B i d . , 1904); 5 t h e d . , 1908; 6 t h ed., 1919. The 1st ed. was t r a n s l a t e d
i n t o I t . (1881) and E. (1882).
 20 Thoms en, E sprogvidenskabens h i s t o r i e (Copenhagen: G.E.C. Gad,
1902); t r a n s l . i n t o G. ( l 9 2 7 ) , Russ. (1938), and Span. (1945).

21 P e d e r s en, Sprogvidens kaben i det nittende Aarhundrede: Metoder

og ResuZtater (Copenhagen: Gyldendal, 1924); f o r E. t r a n s l . s e e Pedersen,
1962. T h i s s t u d y was preceded by a n o t h e r account by Pedersen, E t BZik
paa Sprogvidenskabens Historie (Copenhagen: U n i v e r s i t e t s b o g t r y k k e r i e t ,
1916) .
22 For two p a r t i c u l a r l y s t r i k i n g examples of t h e e x c e s s i v e r e l i a n c e
on secondary and t e r t i a r y s o u r c e s and a n almost t o t a l l a c k of acquain-
t a n c e w i t h t h e primary l i t e r a t u r e , s e e t h e s t u d i e s of Waterman (1970)
and Leroy (1963; 2nd r e v . e d . , 1971), and our forthcoming reviews of
t h e s e i n GL.

23 W e b a s e our account on a p r e - f i n a l d r a f t of Hoenigwald's p a p e r ,

a copy of which w e r e c e i v e d through t h e k i n d o f f i c e s of t h e a u t h o r .

24 Bach, " S t r u c t u r a l L i n g u i s t i c s and t h e Philosophy of Science",

Diogenes 51: 111-28 ( l 9 6 5 ) , e s p pp. 122f f . .
25 Chomsky, "De quelques c o n s t a n t e s d e l a t h 6 o r i e l i n g u i s t i q u e " ,
~robZ2mesdu Zangage ( P a r i s : Gallimard, 1966), 14-21.

26 Chomsky, 1966; c f . t h e reviews of t h i s book by H e r b e r t E. B r e k l e

i n Ling. Berichte 1:52-66 (1969); K a r l E. Zimrner i n IJAL 34: 290-303
(1968); V i v i a n G. Salmon i n J L 5:165-87 (1969) and a l s o Hans A a r s l e f f ' s
violent a t t a c k , "The H i s t o r y of L i n g u i s t i c s and P r o f e s s o r Chomsky",
Language 46:570-85 (1970), and Reginald Lee Hannaford's p a p e r , "Animad-
v e r s i o n s on Some Recent S p e c u l a t i o n s Concerning t h e Contemporary S i g n i -
f i c a n c e of ' C a r t e s i a n ~ i n g u i s t i c s " ' , A[IO]CIL 11, 247-51 (1970).

27 i t i s t r u e , however, t h a t t h e r e a r e always s t u d e n t s w i t h a pre-

f e r e n c e f o r g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y a l o n g s i d e w i t h o t h e r , no l e s s a r d e n t
s t u d e n t s who f a v o u r t h e a n a l y s i s of a s p e c i f i c language o r group of l a n -
guages, b u t we a r e s a f e i n s a y i n g t h a t one c a t e g o r y of r e s e a r c h e r s i s
f r e q u e n t l y i g n o r e d a t times when t h e work of t h e o t h e r i s p r e v a i l i n g .
28
Verburg, "The Background f o r t h e L i n g u i s t i c Conceptions of Franz
Bopp", Lingua 2: 438-68 (1950) ; r e p r . i n Portraits of Linguists I, 221-50
a t p. 225. F o r similar and somewhat more p o s i t i v e s t a t e m e n t s t o t h i s
e f f e c t c f . t h o s e by Ullmann i n 1958 (quoted as motto t o 2 . 2 . 2 ) , ~ & i -
S t r a u s s of 1963, and Lepschy i n 1965 ( b o t h l i s t e d i n n o t e 3 of s e c t i o n 2 . 0 ) .

29 See Thomas A l b e r t Sebeok's "Foreword" t o Godel's Geneva SchooZ

Reader o f 1969, p. v i i .

30 Schuchardt, a n o t h e r s c h o l a r who cannot b e s a i d t o b e a n a d h e r e n t

of t h e neogrammarian d o c t r i n e , a f f i r m e d much t h e same i n h i s 1917 r e v i e w
of CLG ( c f . Hugo Schuchardt-Brevier, 330) a s d i d M e i l l e t ( c f . LHLG I, 4 8 ) ,
and o t h e r s . Cf. a l s o Eugen L e r c h ' s r e v e a l i n g a r t i c l e , ''Die neue Sprach-
w i s s e n s c h a f t : S p r a c h g e s c h i c h t e und Nationenkunde", NSpr 42:375ff. (1934).
It i s of h i s t o r i c a l i n t e r e s t t o n o t e t h a t Whitney a f f i r m e d , a s e a r l y a s
1875: "As l i n g u i s t i c s i s a h i s t o r i c a l s c i e n c e , s o i t s e v i d e n c e s a r e
h i s t o r i c a l , and i t s methods of proof of t h e same c h a r a c t e r . " ( s . LGL,
a t Page 312). This a f f i r m a t i o n , we b e l i e v e , would u n d e r s c o r e W h i t n e y l s
impact on t h e l i n g u i s t i c s of h i s time, i n p a r t i c u l a r t h e neogrammarians,
c o n t r a r y t o Leroy's (1967:29) c o n t e n t i o n t h a t Whitney's work "had no
immediate r e p e r c u s s i o n s " .

31 Cf. I o r d a n ' s e a r l y a r t i c l e , "Der h e u t i g e Stand d e r romanischen

f Festschr. Streitberg, 585-621 (19 24) , e s p pp 608-13,
~ ~ r a c h w i s s e n s c hta", . .
620-21.

32 Cf. t h e "Vowort" by F r i e d r i c h Sander and Hans ~ o l k e l ft o t h e i r

c o l l e c t i o n of p a p e r s , GanzheitspsychoZogie (Munich: A Beck, 1962), where
they s t a t e : "Es s c h e i n t b e i n a h e d i e R e g e l zu s e i n , d a s s f r u c h t b a r e For-
s h u n g s a n s Z t z e a u s s e r h a l b und auch i n n e r h a l b i h r e s Ursprungslandes e r s t
e i n e Genera t i o n s p g t e r z u r Wirkung kommen. " (p i x f ) . ..
33 We a r e n o t s u f f i c i e n t l y f a m i l i a r w i t h t h e r e c e p t i o n of FdS1s
d o c t r i n e i n Japan f o l l o w i n g t h e J a p . t r a n s l . of t h e CLG i n 1928 t o b e
a b l e t o comment f o r t h i s c o u n t r y . According t o Hisanosuke I z u i , FdS1s
i n f l u e n c e i n J a p a n was "immense" ( c f . h i s p a p e r , "Recent Trends i n J a p a n e s e
L i n g u i s t i c s " , Trends 11, 38-55 [1963], esp. pp. 54-5), and i f t h e f a c t
t h a t t h e r e has been a 23rd p r i n t i n g of t h i s t r a n s l . i n 1970 i s a n a d e q u a t e
c r i t e r i o n , I z u i ' s c l a i m may w e l l b e j u s t i f i e d .

34 Cf., a p a r t from Bach's a r t i c l e ( r e f e r r e d t o i n n o t e 2 4 ) , R. B.

~ e e s 'review of Chomsky (1957) i n Language 33:375-407 (1957), E. M.
Uhlenb e c k l s "An A p p r a i s a l of Transformation Theory", Lingua 12 :1-18
(1963) o r M. B i e r w i s c h l s a f f i r m a t i o n t h a t w i t h Chomskyls Syntactic Struc-
t m e s "war e i n e neue E n t w i c k l u n g s s t u f e d e r s t r u k t u r e l l e n Sprachwissen-
s c h a f t m a r k i e r t " (1966: 104) .
35 H e l b i g (1970: 265-324) t r e a t s t h e s e t h r e e phases e x t e n s i v e l y .

36 Cf. Chomsky, 1 9 6 4 : l O f . 21, 23, 26, 67, 68, 108, 111, n . ; 1965:4,
8, 47-8; 1966:17, 19, i n which Chomsky makes e x p l i c i t r e f e r e n c e s t o
S a u s s u r e . Unacknowledged passages which d e p i c t Saussurean i n f l u e n c e
c o u l d b e e a s i l y t r a c e d ; c f . Chomsky 's d e f i n i t i o n of language and h i s
a p p a r e n t d i f f i c u l t y i n s e p a r a t i n g language s t u d y from psychology ( s .
Chomsky, 1968: 24).

37 I n i t i a l l y ( c f . t h e summary of our d i s s e r t a t i o n i n p r o g r e s s i n
Ling. Berichte 9: 52-4 [1970], a t pp. 53-4), we i n t e n d e d t o g i v e , i n t h e
second p a r t of t h e d i s s e r t a t i o n , a d e s c r i p t i o n of t h e v a r i o u s ' s c h o o l s '
which h a v e developed d u r i n g t h e p a s t f i f t y y e a r s f o l l o w i n g t h e p u b l i c a t i o n
of t h e Cowls. We l a t e r abandoned t h i s i d e a f o r s e v e r a l r e a s o n s : 1 )
a d e s c r i p t i o n of t h e v a r i o u s l i n g u i s t i c s c h o o l s , e . g . t h o s e of Prague,
Copenhagen, Geneva, e t c . , h a s b e e n done i n t h e l i t e r a t u r e q u i t e f r e q u e n t l y ,
and o u r own endeavours would not have amounted t o much more t h a n a r e h a s h
of t h e i n f o r m a t i o n provided t h e r e ; 2) t h e s e ' s c h o o l s ' have t a k e n c e r t a i n
a s p e c t s from t h e Cours and developed them f u r t h e r , o f t e n d i s r e g a r d i n g
t h e o r i g i n a l c o n t e x t , i n t o t h e o r i e s f a r removed from what S a u s s u r e had
had i n mind; 3) a re-assessment of S a u s s u r e ' s o r i g i n a l i n t e n t i o n s w i t h
t h e h e l p of t h e r e c e n t l y p u b l i s h e d documentation provided by R . Godel and
R. Engler i s u r g e n t l y needed. Even t h e most r e c e n t " h i s t o r i e s " of (modern)
l i n g u i s t i c s e i t h e r i g n o r e t h e e x i s t e n c e of Godel's Sources manuserites
and E n g l e r ' s c r i t i c a l e d i t i o n of t h e Cours ( e . g . Waterman, 1970) o r shy
.
away from such a n u n d e r t a k i n g (cf Helbig, 1970: 33; Lepschy, 1970: 43-4) ;
M. Leroy h a s a t l e a s t made u s e of t h e c r i t i c a l e d i t i o n ( c f . Leroy, 1971:
6 2 f f . ) and e x p l i c i t l y drawn a t t e n t i o n t o t h e s e two works (1971:77-8),
b u t h e d i d n o t f e e l t h e n e c e s s i t y f o r changing h i s p r e v i o u s p o s i t i o n
r e g a r d i n g t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h e C o w s i n any n o t a b l e s e n s e .
1.0 F. DE SAUSSURE AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF H I S L I N G U I S T I C THEORY

En f a i t i Z n'y a pas eu des structuraZistes

parce que Saussure en Europe, BZoomfield en
Amzrique, ont composz des oeuvres pi font
date; Saussure e t BZoomfieZd sont devenus
des points de rzfe'rences parce qu ' i l y avait
des structuraZistes avant e m , e t des non-
structuraZis t e s .
~ o b e r t - ~ 6 oWagner
n i n 1966
*

1.1 A Biographical Sketch of Ferdinand de Saussure

I n a r e c e n t b i b l i o g r a p h i c a l r e c o r d of t h e "Geneva School of L i n g u i s -
t i c s " M. Mourelle-Lema observed t h a t c o n c e r n i n g t h e l i f e of Ferdinand I

d e Saussure "there i s l i t t l e t o b e s a i d " (l969:4). Everyone who i s

f a m i l i a r w i t h S a u s s u r e ' s work w i l l c o n t e s t t h i s a f f i r m a t i o n , and f o l l o w
t h e o b s e r v a t i o n of G. Mounin t h a t , by c o n t r a s t w i t h t h e biography of
many o t h e r s c i e n t i s t s and s c h o l a r s , S a u s s u r e ' s c u r r i c u l u m v i t a e c o n s t i -
t u t e s a problem i n i t s e l f , e s p e c i a l l y s i n c e i t i s i n t r i n s i c a l l y connected
1
w i t h a t r u e u n d e r s t a n d i n g of h i s work. Mounin b a s e s h i s s t a t e m e n t
on t h e r e c e n t f i n d i n g s of T. De Mauro i n h i s " N o t i z i e b i o g r a f i c h e e
c r i t i c h e s u F. d e Saussure", which h e a t t a c h e d t o t h e 1967 I t a l i a n t r a n s -
l a t i o n of t h e Corns ( s . De Mauro, 1968:283-334). De Mauro's s t u d y , i t
s h o u l d b e n o t e d , r e p r e s e n t s t h e f i r s t s e r i o u s a t t e m p t t o e v a l u a t e Saus-
s u r e ' s l i f e i n t h e l i g h t of h i s e d u c a t i o n a l background and t h e p r e v a i l i n g
i n t e l l e c t u a l a c t i v i t i e s of h i s time, i n p a r t i c u l a r t h o s e which c o n c e r n
t h e i n v e s t i g a t i o n of l i n g u i s t i c phenomena. De Mauro, however, f a l l s
s h o r t of p r o v i d i n g a complete p i c t u r e of t h e g e n e r a l t r e n d s of t h e second
h a l f of t h e 1 9 t h c e n t u r y , n o t o n l y i n t h e f i e l d s of philosophy, psychology,
s o c i o l o g y , and ( p o l i t i c a l ) economy, b u t a l s o i n t h e g e n e r a l h i s t o r y and
p o l i t i c s of t h e s e v e n t i e s and e i g h t i e s which may w e l l have had a n impact
on t h e r e v i t a l i z a t i o n of s c h o l a r i y a c t i v i t i e s i n t h a t p e r i o d , and n o t
l e a s t i n t h e f i e l d of l i n g u i s t i c s c i e n c e . It should, t h e r e f o r e , b e borne
i n mind t h a t F. d e S a u s s u r e (1857-1913) was n o t o n l y t h e contemporary
o f l i n g u i s t s such a s Franz Boas (1858-1942), O t t o J e s p e r s e n (1860-1943),
P a u l P a s s y (1859-1940), t o name o n l y a few, b u t a l s o of t h e founder of
p s y c h o a n a l y s i s , Sigmund Freud (1858-1939), t h e s o c i o l o g i s t Emile Durkheim
(l858-1917), t h e p h i l o s o p h e r H e n r i Bergson (l859-1941), and a number of
o t h e r well-known c o n t r i b u t o r s t o t h e advancement of s c i e n c e and g e n e r a l
knowledge of man. To o u t l i n e t h e i n t e l l e c t u a l s c e n e of Western Europe
i n t h e l a t e 1 9 t h c e n t u r y would go f a r beyond t h e s c o p e of t h e p r e s e n t
s t u d y ; i n t h i s c h a p t e r o n l y t h o s e s t a g e s of S a u s s u r e ' s academic c a r e e r
w i l l b e s k e t c h e d o u t which we b e l i e v e n e c e s s a r y f o r a more a d e q u a t e
u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f h i s work.
2
Mongin-Ferdinand d e S a u s s u r e (1857-1913) was born i n t o a d i s t i n -
3
g u i s h e d Geneva f a m i l y w i t h a long t r a d i t i o n of s c h o l a r l y a c t i v i t y .
Surrounded a s h e was by s c i e n t i f i c q u e s t f o r knowledge and a v a r i e t y
of i n t e l l e c t u a l endeavours, i t i s n o t s u r p r i s i n g t h a t S a u s s u r e s h o u l d
have h i m s e l f chosen an academic c a r e e r . A f t e r completion of h i s secondary
e d u c a t i o n which d i d n o t o f f e r him much of a c h a l l e n g e , h e e n t e r e d Geneva
U n i v e r s i t y i n 1875 a t t h e a g e of s e v e n t e e n , i n o r d e r t o p u r s u e s t u d i e s
i n t h e n a t u r a l s c i e n c e s which had been t h e t r a d i t i o n a l s u b j e c t of i n t e r e s t
and thorough i n v e s t i g a t i o n i n h i s f a m i l y . It was about t h e same time,
however, t h a t S a u s s u r e was i n i t i a t e d , through a f r i e n d of h i s f a m i l y ,
Adolphe P i c t e t (1799-1875), a u t h o r of t h e voluminous O r i g i n e s indo-
4
emop6ennes ( P a r i s 1859-61), i n t o l i n g u i s t i c s t u d i e s . Saussure r e p o r t s
(CFS 17:17) t h a t even a t t h e a g e of t w e l v e h e had r e a d a number of c h a p t e r s
from t h i s book and t h a t h e had v e n t u r e d t o o u t l i n e "un s y s t s m e g 6 n 6 r a l
du languagen which h e p r e s e n t e d t o P i c t e t . The l a t t e r p r a i s e d him f o r
h i s e f f o r t s , b u t warned him a g a i n s t such overambitious a t t e m p t s , w i t h
t h e r e s u l t t h a t S a u s s u r e abandoned h i s i d e a s "sur t o u t s y s t s m e u n i v e r s e 1
du langage". S t i l l a t Geneva, S a u s s u r e d e c i d e d t o a t t e n d c o u r s e s i n
Indo-European, e s p e c i a l l y t h e c l a s s i c languages. But s i n c e h e had f a m i l -
i a r i z e d h i m s e l f w i t h C u r t i u s ' Grundxiige d e r g r i e c h i s c h e n EtymoZogie
( L e i p z i g 1858-62), t h e r e was n o t v e r y much h e could add t o h i s know-
l e d g e and i n d e e d S a u s s u r e f e l t , 'as h e s t a t e d l a t e r on, t h a t h i s s t a y
a t Geneva U n i v e r s i t y (1875-6) had c o s t him y e t a n o t h e r y e a r ; i n h i s
view, h e had a l r e a d y l o s t one y e a r a t c o l l e g e b e f o r e b e i n g a d m i t t e d
t o t h e Geneva Gymnasium. P r e c o c i t y , a s i n t h e c a s e of h i s famous g r e a t -
g r a n d f a t h e r Horace B e n e d i c t e d e S a u s s u r e (1740-99) who was a p p o i n t e d
a s p r o f e s s o r a t t h e a g e of twenty-two, was a n o t i c e a b l e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c
of Ferdinand d e ~ a u s s u r e ' s . ~I n t h e f a l l of 1876 h e went t o L e i p z i g
U n i v e r s i t y ; t h i s was p u r e a c c i d e n t , b u t a number of h i s Geneva f r i e n d s
had a l r e a d y s t u d i e d t h e r e and h i s p a r e n t s were a n x i o u s , b e c a u s e of h i s
youth, t h a t h e s h o u l d b e surrounded by h i s country-men when l i v i n g i n a
foreign c i t y . T h i s d e c i s i o n , however, t o s t u d y Indo-European l i n g u i s t i c s
a t L e i p z i g was t o become a v e r y f o r t u n a t e one f o r S a u s s u r e , d e s p i t e some
of t h e p e r s o n a l drawbacks h e had t o e n c o u n t e r .
P r i o r t o h i s a r r i v a l a t L e i p z i g , S a u s s u r e had a l r e a d y become, on
May 1 3 , 1876, a member of t h e ~ o c i g t gd e L i n g u i s t i q u e de P a r i s through
t h e i n t e r c e s s i o n of a f r i e n d of h i s f a m i l y , Leopold Favre, and i n 1903
h e noted: " . . . j'envoyai d e Gensve un a r t i c l e i n e p t e ' s u r l e s u f f i x e
-t- r , oa je tremblais, 2 chaque l i g n e , d e d i r e quelque chose q u i n e fOt
pas d ' a c c o r d a v e c Bopp, devenu mon unique m a r t r e . 116 This p a p e r was
a c c e p t e d and appeared i n t h e Mgmoires of t h e S o c i e t y (MSLP 3:197-209).
Two more a r t i c l e s were w r i t t e n i n t h e same y e a r p l u s a few n o t e s on h i s -
t o r i c a l phonology. The f i r s t i m p o r t a n t a r t i c l e , however, was h i s " E s s a i
d'une d i s t i n c t i o n des d i f f g r e n t s a indo-europ6ens," which was r e a d a t
t h e J a n u a r y 1 3 t h , 1877 meeting of t h e P a r i s L i n g u i s t i c S o c i e t y . Even
a t t h i s e a r l y s t a g e S a u s s u r e a t t e m p t e d t o s o l v e t h e problem of t h e P r o t o -
Indo-European vowel system which was t h e n t h o u g h t t o b e e s s e n t i a l l y t h e
same as t h e S a n s k r i t system which shows o n l y t h r e e c a r d i n a l vowels.
S a u s s u r e a r g u e d t h a t t h i s could n o t h o l d t r u e f o r t h e o r i g i n a l s t a t e
o f t h e P.I.E. language, though h e could n o t y e t o f f e r a s a t i s f a c t o r y
solution. I n t h e concluding paragraph of t h i s p a p e r (MSLP 3:369) S a u s s u r e
r e p o r t e d t h a t h e had found t h a t t h e a l t e r n a t i o n k / c i n t h e Indo-Aryan
languages was caused by t h e p r e s e n c e o r a b s e n c e of a n o r i g i n a l Indo-
European A which followed t h e consonant, t h u s making h i m s e l f one of t h e
d i s c o v e r e r s of t h e "Law of P a l a t a l s . ,I7
 The f i r s t German p r o f e s s o r t h e young s t u d e n t met a t L e i p z i g Univer-
s i t y was t h e Indo-Europeanist He'inrich ~Gbschmann(1848-1908) who o f f e r e d
a seminar on Old P e r s i a n which S a u s s u r e followed w i t h i n t e r e s t . I t was
through him t h a t h e h e a r d t h a t a s t u d y which had j u s t appeared i n C u r t i u s '
S t u d i e n had a r o u s e d much apprehension: K a r l Brugmann (1849-1919), then
a P r i v a t d o z e n t , p u b l i s h e d a n a r t i c l e e n t i t l e d " N a s a l i s sonans i n d e r
indogermanischen Grundsprache", i n which h e a s s e r t e d t h a t i n t h e p a r e n t
language of t h e Germanic language f a m i l y t h e r e must have been s y l l a b l e s
w i t h o u t vowels, s y l l a b l e s i n which n a s a l s had s y l l a b i c f u n c t i o n , and i n
which h e assumed t h a t t h i s s h o u l d have a p p l i e d t o l i q u i d s a s w e l l .
S a u s s u r e , who had made t h e same d i s c o v e r y w h i l e s t i l l a t t e n d i n g s c h o o l
i n Geneva ( c f . Pedersen, 1962:284, n . l ) , was q u i t e b a f f l e d t o u n d e r s t a n d
t h a t t h i s was c o n s i d e r e d a s something n o v e l and could n e v e r f o r g e t f o r t h e
remainder of h i s l i f e , t h a t t h i s d i s c o v e r y was always connected w i t h t h e
8
name of Brugmann.
S a u s s u r e s t a y e d a t L e i p z i g f o r f o u r s e m e s t e r s (1876-77, 1877-78)
and r e g u l a r l y followed c o u r s e s i n comparative grammar by Georg C u r t i u s
(1820-85) (CFS 17:22), a l s o c o u r s e s i n S l a v o n i c and L i t h u a n i a n by August
Leskien (1840-1916), a p a r t of a c o u r s e on C e l t i c by E r n s t Windisch
(1844-1918), a n elementary c o u r s e on S a n s k r i t by Hermann Osthoff (1847-
1909), and a u d i t e d Wilhelm Braune's (1850-1926) c o u r s e on t h e h i s t o r y
of t h e German language (CFS l 7 : 2 l ) . S a u s s u r e a l s o r e p o r t s ( i b i d . , 22-3)
t h a t h e had p a r t i c u l a r t i e s w i t h Brugmann, t h e l e a d i n g f i g u r e of t h e
Young Turks a t L e i p z i g .
I n 1876, when t h e young S a u s s u r e came t o L e i p z i g U n i v e r s i t y , K a r l
Verner was 30, Brugmann was 27, Osthoff was 29, S i e v e r s and Braune were
26 ( c f . Hockett, l965:186). He soon was t o j o i n t h e s e l i n g u i s t s i n
s u p p o r t of t h e i r major t e n e t s , p e r h a p s even going f a r beyond them; i n
December 1878, w h i l e s t i l l a s t u d e n t , h i s Mgmoire SUP Ze systzme primitif
d e s voyeZles d m s Zes Zangues indo-europ6ennes appeared i n L e i p z i g .
S a u s s u r e had t h e n moved t o B e r l i n U n i v e r s i t y f o r two s e m e s t e r s (1878-79)
t o p u r s u e t h e s t u d y of S a n s k r i t w i t h H e i n r i c h Zimmer (1851-1910) and
H e i n r i c h Oldenberg (1854-1920) .
The Me'moire which appearkd when S a u s s u r e was 21 i s a phenomenal
9
achievement, b o t h i n g e n e r a l s c h o l a r s h i p and methodological r i g o u r .
I n t h i s monograph of c o n s i d e r a b l e l e n g t h S a u s s u r e devoted h i s e f f o r t s
t o t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t of a f i r m b k i s f o r t h e o r i g i n a l I E vowels, employing
t h e n o t i o n o f system i n a f a r more r i g o r o u s s e n s e t h a n i t had e v e r been
used before.'' M. Leroy n o t e s t h a t S a u s s u r e went f a r beyond what t h e
t i t l e of h i s Mzmoire i m p l i e s , s i n c e h e b u i l t up a t h e o r y of t h e r o o t which
w a s t o s e r v e as t h e b a s i s f o r subsequent s t u d i e s i n I E morphology:

T h i s w a s t h e p a t t e r n consonant + vowel + consonant (Type

*ten-) which, a s a r e s u l t of t h e f l e x i b l e system of a l t e r -
n a t i o n s of vowels and s o n a n t s , can t a k e extremely v a r i e d
forms, s o t h a t some t h a t had h i t h e r t o been thought a b e r r a n t
now found a r a t i o n a l e x p l a n a t i o n . F i n a l l y , c o n f r o n t e d w i t h
t h e a p p a r e n t l y i n s o l u b l e c a s e of a l t e r n a t i o n s which, i n
c e r t a i n r o o t s , seemed t o f a l l o u t s i d e t h e normal p a t t e r n
e/o/zero (such as t h e L a t i n t y p e f e e i / f & t u s ) , Saussure
imagined, f o r p u r e l y t h e o r e t i c a l r e a s o n s , t h e e x i s t e n c e
i n Indo-European o f a phoneme ( l a t e r c a l l e d shwa and rep-
r e s e n t e d b y a ) which had been a n i n t e g r a l p a r t of t h e very
f l e x i b l e system of s o n a n t s b u t had d i s a p p e a r e d i n t h e h i s -
t o r i c a l l y a t t e s t e d languages. (Leroy, 1967: 33) 11 .
S a u s s u r e ' s seemingly d a r i n g hypotheses were n o t q u i c k l y understood
by h i s f e l l o w - l i n g u i s t s and much of h i s i n s i g h t could n o t b e proved
u n t i l a f t e r h i s d e a t h ; e . g . h e claimed t h a t t h e l o n g vowels of PIE had
developed from s h o r t vowels p l u s s o n a n t c o e f f i c i e n t s , a h y p o t h e s i s which
could n o t b e confirmed u n t i l 1927 when J e r z y Kurykowicz (1895- ) pointed
o u t t h a t t h e H i t t i t e consonants t r a n s c r i b e d w i t h h correspond i n some
Y

cognates t o t h o s e which S a u s s u r e had assumed on t h e o r e t i c a l grounds

( c f . SM, 23, n . 1 ) . The s o n a n t s S a u s s u r e proposed were i n t e r p r e t e d by
Hermann M d l l e r (1850-1923), a s e a r l y a s 1879 ( c f .'ES 3: 151, n . 1 ) , as
s u p p o r t i n g his c l a i m t h a t S e m i t i c and 1 n d o - ~ u r o ~ e a were
n cognate f a m i l i e s ,
12
and h a v e s u b s e q u e n t l y become known a s l a r y n g a l s .
S t r e i t b e r g a f f i r m e d i n 1914 t h a t S a u s s u r e ' s contemporaries had
h a i l e d t h e ~ 6 m o i r eas a major achievement i n I E phonology, b u t had been
u n a b l e t o u n d e r s t a n d i t s p r i n c i p a l t h e o r e t i c a l i m p l i c a t i o n s . l3 m e
r e s u l t s of his i n v e s t i g a t i o n s were soon i n t e g r a t e d i n t o t h e t e x t b o o k s
which were p u b l i s h e d soon a f t e w a r d s , 1 4 b u t o n l y a g e n e r a t i o n l a t e r
S a u s s u r e r e c e i v e d t h e wide r e c o g n i t i o n h e deserved.15 It i s s i g n i f i c a n t
t h a t R. Godel, who i s s u r e l y t h e b e s t informed s c h o l a r a s r e g a r d s t h e
l i f e and work of F. de S a u s s u r e , n o t e d i n 1957 t h a t , comparing t h e I&moire
w i t h t h e C o w s , one might b e l e d t o b e l i e v e t h a t t h e r e was q u i t e a n a t u r a l
development, s u p p o r t e d by v a r i o u s c i r c u m s t a n c e s , which conducted S a u s s u r e
from comparative grammar t o t h e t h e o r y of language ( c f . SM, 2 4 ) . Godel
p r o v i d e s much e v i d e n c e t o s u p p o r t t h i s c o n j e c t u r e t o t h e e x t e n t t h a t
G. C. Lepschy c o u l d , about t e n y e a r s l a t e r , s t a t e t h a t " S a u s s u r e ' s
d i s c o v e r i e s [ i n t h e Mgmoire] depend on a n a n a l y s i s which today we would
not h e s i t a t e t o c a l l structural. Taking i n t o account t h e whole system,
h e p o s t u l a t e s elements of a n a b s t r a c t c h a r a c t e r which a r e d e f i n e d on t h e
b a s i s of t h e i r s t r u c t u r a l f u n c t i o n r a t h e r t h a n t h e i r p h o n e t i c shape".
(1970: 4 2 ) .
For o u r p r e s e n t s t u d y i t i s i m p o r t a n t t o n o t e t h a t S a u s s u r e d i d n o t
a c t u a l l y s w i t c h from t r a d i t i o n a l h i s t o r i c a l l i n g u i s t i c s and comparative
I E i n v e s t i g a t i o n s t o g e n e r a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s of t h e n a t u r e of l a n g u a g e
towards t h e end of h i s l i f e , b u t t h a t t h e r e was r a t h e r a s t e a d y p r o g r e s s i o n
from (what a p p e a r s t o b e ) d i a c h r o n i c l i n g u i s t i c s t o t h e s y n c h r o n i c approach
t o language. I n f a c t , i n h i s Mgmoire, S a u s s u r e d i d n o t f o l l o w t h e t r a d i -
t i o n a l h i s t o r i c a l and " a t o m i s t i c " approach which was s o c h a r a c t e r i s t i c
of t h e l i n g u i s t i c s of h i s t i m e , b u t was concerned w i t h e s t a b l i s h i n g a
g i v e n language s t a t e . A s l a t e a s i n 1909, i n a n i n t e r v i e w w i t h A l b e r t
R i e d l i n g e r , S a u s s u r e h e l d t h a t one s h o u l d s t a r t w i t h h i s t o r i c a l l i n g u i s -
t i c s b e f o r e d e a l i n g w i t h s y n c h r o n i c l i n g u i s t i c s ( c f . SM, 2 9 ) , and George
~ g g a l l i e r , a n o t h e r of S a u s s u r e ' s s t u d e n t s , n o t e d from S a u s s u r e ' s l e c t u r e s '

on g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s (1908-09) t h a t S a u s s u r e regarded s t a t i c l i n g u i s t i c s
a s d i f f i c u l t and t h a t , by comparison, " l a l i n g u i s t i q u e g v o l u t i v e e s t
amusante" ( s . SM, 8 8 ) . T h i s i s p a r a l l e l e d by s t u d e n t s ' n o t e s which
confirm t h a t d u r i n g even t h e t h i r d and l a s t of S a u s s u r e ' s c o u r s e s on
g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s S a u s s u r e d e a l t mainly w i t h Zes Zangues almost d u r i n g
t h e whole f i r s t s e m e s t e r b e f o r e t h e second a s p e c t , Za Zangue, was i n t r o -
duced ( c f . SM, 35) .
A s we h a v e a l r e a d y s t a t e d , t h e impact of t h e M6moire on I E l i n g u i s -
t i c s was n o t a t f i r s t f u l l y understood and i n a d d i t i o n S a u s s u r e was
exposed t o v a r i o u s , a t times r a t h e r p e r s o n a l a t t a c k s p a r t i c u l a r l y from
Osthoff who had l e f t L e i p z i g i n 1877 t o assume a p r o f e s s o r s h i p a t
Heidelberg university.16 S a u s s u r e may have l a t e r drawn some s a t i s f a c t i o n
from t h e s t a t e m e n t Brugmann made' i n h i s o b i t u a r y of Osthoff i n 1909
concerning t h e l a t t e r ' s T<efstufe i m i n d o g e m a n i s e h e n VokaZismus of
1881, i n which Osthoff had c a r r i e d on h i s polemics a g a i n s t S a u s s u r e and
Hermann ~ d 1 l e r . l ~
According t o Brugmann t h i s p r i n c i p a l s t u d y of O s t h o f f ' s
f e l l s h o r t i n many r e s p e c t s of t h e Mgmoire, t o t h e e x t e n t t h a t i t c o u l d
n o t s e r v e a s much more t h a n a v a s t c o l l e c t i o n of d a t a (IFAnz 24:221).
S a u s s u r e r e t u r n e d t o L e i p z i g f o r t h e Winter s e m e s t e r 1879180 t o
t a k e h i s d o c t o r a l examination i n February 1880 which h e passed s m a
cwn Zaude. H i s d i s s e r t a t i o n , De Z 'enrpZoi du g e n i t i f absoZu en s a n s e r i t
(Geneva: F i c k , 1881) a p p e a r s t o h a v e d i s a p p o i n t e d h i s c o n t e m p o r a r i e s ;
i t w a s f e l t t h a t i t c o n t r a s t e d s h a r p l y w i t h t h e Mgmoire. Streitberg,
though c r e d i t i n g S a u s s u r e f o r h i s e x c e l l e n t p h i l o l o g i c a l t r a i n i n g and
h i s thorough a c q u a i n t a n c e w i t h I n d i a n l i t e r a t u r e , c a l l e d i t a " f l e i s s i g e
K l e i n a r b e i t , einem wenig ergiebigem Thema gewidmet" (I& 2:107), and
M e i l l e t termed i t "un s i m p l e a r t i c l e t e c h n i q u e " (LHLG 11, 1 7 7 ) . During
t h e y e a r s which followed h i s s t a y a t L e i p z i g and B e r l i n S a u s s u r e p u b l i s h e d
l i t t l e , b u t i t i s g e n e r a l l y a g r e e d t h a t h i s a r t i c l e s were always p r e c i s e ,
well-judged, i n f o r m a t i v e and p h i l o l o g i c a l l y sound. G. C. Lepschy s u s p e c t s
t h a t t h e " e x a c t i n g m e t h o d o l o g i c a l r e q u i r e m e n t s of h i s t h e o r e t i c a l r i g o u r ,
which had produced such e x t r a o r d i n a r y r e s u l t s i n t h e Mgmoire, a f t e r w a r d s
seemed t o p a r a l y s e S a u s s u r e ' s s c i e n t i f i c production" (1970:42), b u t
we s h a l l s e e l a t e r on t h a t t h i s i s o n l y one ( p o s s i b l e ) r e a s o n f o r S a u s s u r e ' s
reduced flow of p u b l i c a t i o n s . It seems t o b e very l i k e l y , though t h e r e
i s no d i r e c t e v i d e n c e , t h a t between h i s d e p a r t u r e from L e i p z i g i n March
and h i s a r r i v a l i n P a r i s i n September 1880, S a u s s u r e t r a v e l l e d t o L i t h u a n i a
18
i n o r d e r t o s t u d y L i t h u a n i a n d i a l e c t s i n l o c o ( c f . De Mauro, 1968:298-9).
S a u s s u r e had n o t o n l y t a k e n a c o u r s e i n t h i s language o f f e r e d by L e s k i e n ,
b u t had proved h i m s e l f t o b e a l i n g u i s t w i t h thorough knowledge of and
profound t r a i n i n g i n Indo-European.
I n h i s p u b l i c a t i o n s on L i t h u a n i a n which h e p r e p a r e d w h i l e a p r o f e s s o r
a t Geneva U n i v e r s i t y , S a u s s u r e n e v e r made r e f e r e n c e t o any o t h e r b u t
written sources. I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g t o n o t e however t h a t h i s o b s e r v a t i o n s
on L i t h u a n i a n i n t o n a t i o n and a c c e n t , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n h i s p a p e r s "A propos
de l ' a c c e n t u a t i o n l i t u a n i e n n e " (MSLP 8:425-46) and "Accentuation l i t u -
anienne" (IFAnz 6:157-66), were d i s c u s s e d and t e s t e d w i t h t h e h e l p of
f i v e n a t i v e i n f o r m a n t s by Robert G a u t h i o t (1876-1916) i n t h e Phonetic
Laboratory d i r e c t e d by P i e r r e J e a n R o u s s e l o t (1846-1924) a t t h e collSge
de F r a n c e i n P a r i s i n 1900 ( s . G a u t h i o t ' s r e p o r t , "De l ' a c c e n t e t de
l a q u a n t i t g en l i t u a n i e n " , P a r o l e 10:143-57, and M e i l l e t ' s comments,
ibid., 193-200; e s p . 195, 196, 198) and v e r i f i e d i n a f i e l d t r i p t o
L i t h u a n i a i n t h e same y e a r . Mourelle-Lema (1969:4), a s was Sechehaye
(IF 44:117) b e f o r e him, i s wrong when h e s t a t e s t h a t Gaufhiot was a
p u p i l of de S a u s s u r e a l t h o u g h i t i s t r u e t h a t G a u t h i o t n o t e s i n h i s
monograph Le parler de Buividze: E s s a i de d e s c r i p t i o n d'un dialecte
Z i t u a n i e n o r i e n t a l ( P a r i s 1903) t h a t h i s r e s e a r c h was " t o u t e n t i s r e
dominge p a r l e s i d 6 e s d e M. F. de S a u s s u r e " ( p . 4 ) . Only d u r i n g t h e
y e a r 1901/02 d i d S a u s s u r e o f f e r a n o t h e r c o u r s e on L i t h u a n i a n , b u t h e
a p p e a r s t o h a v e a l r e a d y s a i d i n h i s w r i t i n g s of t h e m i d - n i n e t i e s what
was e s s e n t i a l , f i n d i n g s which were s t i l l found worthy of much c o n s i d e r a t i o n
i n 1931, when G i u l i a n o ~ o n f $ ( e (1904 - ) published h i s a r t i c l e e n t i t l e d
"Un nuova formulazione d e l l a l e g g e d i F. d e Saussure" ( S t u d i B a Z t i c i
1:73-91; cf . a l s o LHLG 11, 181-2) .
There a p p e a r t o b e a number of r e a s o n s why S a u s s u r e d i d n o t s t a y
i n L e i p z i g a f t e r completion of h i s d o c t o r a t e . We mentioned e a r l i e r t h a t
n o t a b l y Osthoff c a r r i e d on a c o n t r o v e r s y w i t h him. The g e n e r a l i m p r e s s i o n
p r e v a i l s t h a t S a u s s u r e d i d n o t f e e l a t home i n Germany; h e s u r e l y f e l t
h i m s e l f u n a p p r e c i a t e d and n o t understood i n h i s l i n g u i s t i c work, and
German was n o t h i s mother tongue. Mounin's c l a i m , however, seems t o
b e somewhat exaggerated: "Certainement l a f r o i d e u r d e s Allemands vis-2-
v i s d e s e s t r a v a u x compte dans l a d g c i s i o n q u ' i l prend de v e n i r se f i x e r
2 P a r i s en dgcembre 1880. Ce g e s t e d o i t quelque chose aux d g c e p t i o n s
q u ' i l a v a i t gprouv6 2 L e i p z i g " (1968:15). Mounin o v e r l o o k s 1 ) t h e amiable
p e r s o n a l t i e s t h a t S a u s s u r e had w i t h Brugmann, 2) t h a t S a u s s u r e had
decided, b e f o r e going t o L e i p z i g , t o become a member of t h e ~ o c i 6 t g
L i n g u i s t i q u e de P a r i s , and 3) t h e f a c t t h a t h i s a r t i c l e s had u n t i l t h e n
a l l been p r i n t e d i n t h e ~ z m o i r e sof t h a t S o c i e t y ; b e s i d e s , S a u s s u r e was
n e v e r t o p u b l i s h a n y t h i n g i n German, t h e language which p l a y e d a prominent
, .
 28

r 6 l e i n the scholarship of t h a t period. There i s no i n d i c a t i o n t h a t

S a u s s u r e e v e r thought of e s t a b l i k h i n g h i m s e l f i n Germany; h i s move t o
L e i p z i g , a s p r e v i o u s l y s t a t e d , was m o t i v a t e d by t h e s i m p l e f a c t t h a t
Geneva f r i e n d s of h i s had a l r e a d y been a t t h e u n i v e r s i t y .
By l a t e 1880 S a u s s u r e was i n P a r i s , took an a c t i v e p a r t i n t h e
r e g u l a r meetings of t h e L i n g u i s t i c S o c i e t y , and i f E. B e n v e n i s t e ' s
assumptions a r e c o r r e c t ( s . AnnEPHE 1964:23), a p p e a r s t o have a u d i t e d
c o u r s e s o f f e r e d by Michel ~ r 6 a l(1832-1915) and a l s o l e c t u r e s g i v e n
by Abel Bergaigne (1838-88), Louis Havet (l849-1925), and James Darmes-
t e t e r (1849-94). B e n v e n i s t e ' s a s s e r t i o n s were i n f a c t o n l y p a r t l y sub-
s t a n t i a t e d by M. F l e u r y ' s r e p o r t ( i b i d . , 39-40). I n t h e following year
S a u s s u r e was a p p o i n t e d l e c t u r e r a t t h e Ecole p r a t i q u e d e s Hautes Etudes
t o t e a c h Germanic languages, i n p a r t i c u l a r Gothic and Old High German,
t o which l a t e r on S a n s k r i t , L a t i n , P e r s i a n , and L i t h u a n i a n were added.
S a u s s u r e h e l d t h i s p o s i t i o n u n t i l 1891 when Geneva U n i v e r s i t y o f f e r e d
him t h e p r o f e s s o r s h i p of t h e h i s t o r y and comparison of Indo-European
l a n g u a g e s , and i n 1896 t h e c h a i r of S a n s k r i t and Indo-European.
During h i s n i n e y e a r s of t e a c h i n g a t P a r i s (1881-91, w i t h an i n t e r -
r u p t i o n of one y e a r i n 1889/90, f o r r e a s o n s of h e a l t h ) S a u s s u r e a t t r a c t e d
a f a i r number of s t u d e n t s ; among them were Antoine M e i l l e t (1866-1936),
who s u b s t i t u t e d f o r him i n 1889/90, Louis Duveau (1864-1903), who became
S a u s s u r e ' s s u c c e s s o r i n P a r i s , H e n r i Georges D o t t i n (1863-1928), Maurice
Grammont (1866-1946), P a u l Passy (1859-1940), P a u l Boyer (1864-1949),
and J e a n P s i c h a r i (1854-1929). Even ~ r s s n eDarmesteter (1848-88), though
a b o u t t e n y e a r s h i s s e n i o r , a t t e n d e d S a u s s u r e ' s c o u r s e i n 1881/82.
Saussure appears t o have f a s c i n a t e d h i s s t u d e n t s i n h i s l e c t u r e s , b u t
h e was n o t f u l l y understood by any of h i s s t u d e n t s a t P a r i s i n c l u d i n g
M e i l l e t ( c f . Mounin, 1968:48-9), when h i s Cours appeared i n 1916.
When S a u s s u r e , a Swiss p r o t e s t a n t , who d e c l i n e d t o become a Frenchman,
l e f t P a r i s f o r Geneva i n 1891, h e was nominated by h i s s u p e r i o r s , n o t a b l y
Gaston P a r i s (1839-1903), f o r t h e "Croix d e l a ~ 6 g i o nd'honneur 2 t i t r e
6 t r a n g e r W , which h e r e c e i v e d t h e same y e a r , a d i s t i n c t i o n which h e r e -
p o r t e d l y r e v e a l e d o n l y i n 1908 when h i s p u p i l s c e l e b r a t e d t h e t h i r t i e t h
/

a n n i v e r s a r y of h i s Mgmoire and p r e s e n t e d him w i t h a c o l l e c t i o n of a r t i c l e s

i n h i s honour. D i s c r e t i o n and modesty were prominent f e a t u r e s of Saus-
sure's character. ,
There seems t o b e s u f f i c i e n t e v i d e n c e t h a t soon a f t e r h i s a p p o i n t -
ment t o t h e p r o f e s s o r s h i p of I E h i s t o r i c a l and comparative l i n g u i s t i c s
a t Geneva, S a u s s u r e r e v i v e d h i s one-time i n t e r e s t i n g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c
theory. One might w e l l a s k whether t h i s endeavour was t r i g g e r e d by
t h e a p p e a r a n c e of t h e book e n t i t l e d Die Sprachwissenschaft by Georg
von d e r Gabelentz (1840-93) i n L e i p z i g i n 1891. However, posing t h i s
q u e s t i o n now may perhaps b e o v e r e s t i m a t i n g ~ a b e l e n t z ' sp o s s i b l e i n f l u e n c e
on S a u s s u r e and u n d e r e s t i m a t i n g a t t h e same t i m e t h e impact t h e works
of o t h e r s , n o t a b l y Whitney, Baudouin d e Courtenay and Kruszewski, and
t h e Junggrammtiker, might have had. These q u e s t i o n s w i l l b e d e a l t w i t h
i n t h e following chapters (cf. 1.3). It should b e b o r n e i n mind, however,
t h a t S a u s s u r e developed h i s i d e a s p e r t a i n i n g t o g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s
c o m p a r a t i v e l y e a r l y and was n o t unprepared when, i n December 1906, h e
w a s asked t o l e c t u r e on " l i n g u i s t i q u e g & & a l e e t d ' h i s t o i r e e t com-
p a r a i s o n d e s l a n g u e s indo-europ6ennesW (SM,34), a n assignment which
S a u s s u r e a c c e p t e d r e l u c t a n t l y b e c a u s e of t h e e x c e s s i v e demands on h i s
t i m e and, perhaps more s i g n i f i c a n t l y , b e c a u s e h e had many d o u b t s a s t o
whether h e was c a p a b l e of t e a c h i n g t h e s u b j e c t - m a t t e r . As l a t e a s i n
1911 Saussure confessed h i s misgivings with regard t o h i s teachings
on g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s . l9 I n t h e same p r i v a t e c o n v e r s a t i o n w i t h Leopold
G a u t i e r , one of h i s s t u d e n t s a t Geneva, S a u s s u r e was asked whether h e
had been engaged i n t h i s f i e l d p r i o r t o h i s s p e c i a l appointment and
replied: "Au c o n t r a i r e , j e n e c r o i s p a s a v o i r r i e n a j o u t 6 d e p u i s l o r s .
C e s o n t d e s s u j e t s q u i m'ont occup6 s u r t o u t a v a n t 1900" (SM, 3 0 ) .
An i n t e r v i e w S a u s s u r e had w i t h A l b e r t R i e d l i n g e r i n 1909 s u g g e s t s t h e
y e a r 1894.~' I n f a c t , t h e y e a r 1894 seems t o have been a c r u c i a l one,
a s t h e d i s c u s s i o n of t h e s e r e p o r t s by h i s Geneva s t u d e n t s may imply.
T h i s same y e a r Whitney d i e d , and S a u s s u r e was asked by t h e S e c r e t a r y
of t h e American P h i l o l o g i c a l S o c i e t y t o g i v e a n account of t h i s eminent
l i n g u i s t "as a comparative p h i l o l o g i s t " . However S a u s s u r e d i d n o t
complete h i s e s s a y ; t h i s i s a f u r t h e r example of t h e d o u b t s which prayed
c o n s t a n t l y on S a u s s u r e ' s mind, s i n c e h e could n o t b r i n g himself t o c o n s i d e r
Whitney a s a cornparatist.21 Even h i s r e p l y t o t h e S e c r e t a r y was never
finished .
 I n September of t h e same y e a r , on t h e o c c a s i o n of t h e 1 0 t h Congress
of O r i e n t a l i s t s h e l d i n Geneva,, S a u s s u r e r e a d a paper on L i t h u a n i a n
a c c e n t u a t i o n "en f o n c t i o n d e l ' i n t o n a t i o n " , and M e i l l e t s t a t e d i n 1913:
It
Le l i v r e [on L i t h u a n i a n ? ] annonc'e n ' a pas p a r u , e t l ' o n n ' a un a p e r c u
du syst'eme que F. d e S a u s s u r e a v a i t c o n s t i t u ' e " and t h a t o n l y two a r t i c l e s
were p u b l i s h e d i n s t e a d i n 1894 and 1896 ( c f . LHLG 11, 181-2). In a
l e t t e r of J a n u a r y 1894 t o A . M e i l l e t S a u s s u r e e x p r e s s e d h i s d o u b t s and
d i s a p p o i n t m e n t a b o u t l i n g u i s t i c s t u d i e s , one of t h e r a r e i n c i d e n t s d u r i n g
which t h e d i s c r e e t s c h o l a r 'unlocks h i s h e a r t ' :

Mais j e s u i s b i e n d'ego^ut'e d e t o u t c e l a , e t d e l a d i f f i c u l t 6
q u ' i l y a e n g'en&al 2 ' e c r i r e seulement d i x l i g n e s a y a n t
l e s e n s commun en matisre d e f a i t s d e langage. ~r'eoccup'e
s u r t o u t d e p u i s longtemps d e l a c l a s s i f i d a t i o n l o g i q u e d e
c e s f a i t s , d e l a c l a s s i f i c a t i o n d e s p o i n t s d e vue s o u s l e s q u e l s
nous l e s t r a i t o n s , j e v o i s d e p l u s en p l u s 2 l a f o i s l'immen-
s i t 6 d e t r a v a i l q u ' i l f a u d r a i t pour montrer au l i n g u i s t e ce
quriZ f a i t [ c f . CFS 12:59], en r e d u i s a n t chaque o p g r a t i o n 2 s a
c a t G g o r i e pr&ue; e t en mzme temps l ' a s s e z grande [ v a n i t g ,
c o r r e c t e d by B e n v e n i s t e ] d e t o u t c e qu'on p e u t f a i r e f i n a l e -
ment en l i n g u i s t i q u e .
...
Sans [ c e s s e , added by Godel], c e t t e i n e p t i e d e l a t e r m i n o l o g i e
c o u r a n t e , l a n'ecessit'e d e l a r e f o r m e r , e t d e montrer pour c e l a
q u e l l e esp&e d ' o b j e t e s t l a l a n g u e en g&&al, vient gzter
mon p l a i s i r h i s t o r i q u e , quoique j e n ' a i e pas d e p l u s c h e r voeu
que d e n e p a s a v o i r 2 m'occuper d e l a l a n g u e en g6n'eral.
(SM, 31: CFS 21:95 [1964]; c f . CFS 20:13)

During t h e y e a r s a t Geneva U n i v e r s i t y S a u s s u r e p u b l i s h e d l i t t l e ;
each y e a r h e gave a c o u r s e on S a n s k r i t ( a s h i s c h a i r o b l i g e d him t o do)
i n a d d i t i o n t o a v a r i e t y of o t h e r c o u r s e s , Greek and L a t i n phonology
a n d morphology, t h e h i s t o r y of t h e I E v e r b , v a r i o u s Greek d i a l e c t s and
i n s c r i p t i o n s , s t u d i e s of Homer, b u t l a t e r a l s o , a s h e had done two decades
e a r l i e r a t P a r i s , c o u r s e s i n G o t h i c and v a r i o u s Germanic d i a l e c t s and a
c o u r s e on L i t h u a n i a n . It i s a l s o i n t e r e s t i n g t o n o t e t h a t d u r i n g t h e
academic y e a r 1902/03 S a u s s u r e t a u g h t a c o u r s e on "Linguis t i q u e g'eo-
g r a p h i q u e d e l l E u r o p e ( a n c i e n n e e t moderne), avec une i n t r o d u c t i o n s u r
l e s o b j e c t s d e l a l i n g u i s t i q u e g'eographiquet' (SM, 2 6 ) , When, i n 1904,
S a u s s u r e was e n t r u s t e d w i t h t h e c o u r s e on German language and l i t e r a t u r e
h e l e c t u r e d on t h e Nibelungen; h e had been f a s c i n a t e d by Germanic l e g e n d s
for many y e a r s , b u t no one would have known ( s i n c e S a u s s u r e k e p t most
 31

t h i n g s t o h i m s e l f ) had h e n o t been asked t o o f f e r a c o u r s e i n t h i s f i e l d

(cf . the vast number of m s s ., $M, 1 4j CFS 17: 1 1 ) .
I n 1897 S a u s s u r e gave t h r e e l e c t u r e s on t h e t h e o r y of t h e s y l l a b l e
i n t h e Corns de vacances under t h e a u s p i c e s of t h e U n i v e r s i t y . Their
c o n t e n t s appeared t o b e q u i t e o r i g i n a l , and B a l l y , who had k e p t s h o r t h a n d
n o t e s of t h e l e c t u r e s , approached S a u s s u r e l a t e r on s u g g e s t i n g t h a t h e
p u b l i s h h i s f i n d i n g s , and S a u s s u r e t e n t a t i v e l y a g r e e d . But, a c c o r d i n g
t o B a l l y , soon a f t e r w a r d s "sur quelques d g t a i l s , d e s s c r u p u l e s l u i [FdS]
vinrent, et . . . les confBrences n e f u r e n t jamais p u b l i ~ e s " 2 2 IF& (1857-
2923), 56). However, through t h e s e r v i c e s of B a l l y , who p r e s e r v e d h i s
n o t e s , i t was p o s s i b l e t o i n c o r p o r a t e S a u s s u r e ' s l e c t u r e s a s a n appendix
t o t h e " P r i n c i p e s d e phonologie" i n t h e Corns (CLG, 63-95).
I n a d d i t i o n t o h i s i n t e r e s t i n Germanic l e g e n d s , S a u s s u r e i n v e s t i -
g a t e d t h o s e of Theseus and Orion and a number of o t h e r c h a r a c t e r s of
a n t i q u e mythology ( c f . SM, 2 8 ) , b u t i n p a r t i c u l a r h e became v e r y much
absorbed d u r i n g h i s l a t e r y e a r s i n r e s e a r c h of anagrams and hypograms
i n c l a s s i c , medieval and contemporary 1 9 t h c e n t u r y p o e t r y , 2 3 a f a c t
which was p a s s e d over i n s i l e n c e f o r a l m o s t f i f t y y e a r s a f t e r S a u s s u r e ' s
death. It would seem t h a t t h e s e a c t i v i t i e s were found i n c o m p a t i b l e w i t h
t h e r e s t of S a u s s u r e ' s t e a c h i n g s b y h i s Geneva p u p i l s , s i n c e h e was
f i r s t v i s u a l i z e d a s t h e a u t h o r of t h e M&noire, and s i n c e 1916 a s t h e
founder of modern l i n g u i s t i c s .
There a r e i n d i c a t i o n s t h a t S a u s s u r e i n t e n d e d , a s e a r l y a s i n 1894,
t o w r i t e a book c o n c e r n i n g " l e problsme d e l a n a t u r e d e l a l a n g u e e t
d e s fondements d e l a l i n g u i s t i q u e " (SM, 32; c f . CFS 21:95). Regrettably,
t h i s book was n e v e r w r i t t e n n o r would we e v e r have come t o know a b o u t
h i s l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r i e s had h e n o t been asked on December 8 , 1906 t o
succeed J o s e p h Wertheimer (1833-1908) i n g i v i n g a c o u r s e on g e n e r a l
l i n g u i s t i c s and t h e h i s t o r y and comparison of Indo-European languages
(SM, 3 4 ) , which h e began i n January 1907. 24 The f a c t t h a t S a u s s u r e d i d
n o t c o n s i d e r p u b l i s h i n g h i s l e c t u r e s on g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s and t h a t
t h e y were compiled a f t e r h i s d e a t h w i t h t h e h e l p of s t u d e n t s ' n o t e s con-
s t i t u t e s a problem which w i l l b e d e a l t w i t h i n t h e s e c t i o n devoted t o an
a n a l y s i s o f t h e most i n f l u e n t i a l a s p e c t s of Saussurean l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y
( c f . 2.1).
 FOOTNOTES - 1.0/1.1

*Mgthodes de Za grammaire: Tradition e t nouveautg ed. by P i e r r e

Delbouille, e t a l . ( P a r i s , "Les B e l l e s L e t t r e s " , l 9 6 6 ) , p. 187.

Mounin m a i n t a i n s t h a t FdS1s l i f e o n l y "peut s a n s d o u t e e x p l i q u e r

[ S a u s s u r e ' s work] en profondeur, non p a s dans s e s m o t i v a t i o n s h i s t o r i q u e s ,
s o c i o l o g i q u e s ou p e r s o n n e l l e s , mais dans s a t e n e u r e t dans sa forme
m$mesl' (Mounin, 1968:12-3). For f u r t h e r i n f o r m a t i o n on S a u s s u r e s e e
E. F. K. Koerner, BibZiographia Saussureana, 1870-1970, P a r t I , 1,
" B i o g r a p h i c a l s o u r c e s on FdS", i n p a r t i c u l a r t h e o b i t u a r i e s by G a u t h i o t ,
M e i l l e t , and S t r e i t b e r g , a l l of which have been r e p r i n t e d i n Portraits
of Linguists 11, 87-110, a s w e l l a s t h e i n a u g u r a l a d d r e s s by B a l l y of
1913 ( r e p r . i n B a l l y , 1952:147-60); s . a l s o t h e n o t e s by FdS h i m s e l f
e d i t e d by R. Godel, "Souvenirs d e F. d e S a u s s u r e concernant s a j e u n e s s e
e t s e s 6tudes1', CFS 17:12-25 (1960), and "La p l a c e de l a l i n g u i s t i q u e
g 6 n 6 r a l e dans l a v i e d e F. d e Saussure", SM, 23-35.

S . BSLP 3, no. 16:xxix (1876) f o r S a u s s u r e ' s f u l l name, a s a g a i n s t

Mourelle-Lema, 1969 :4.

FdS was b o r n on November 26th, 1857, e l d e s t son of t h e z o o l o g i s t

and e n t o m o l o g i s t Henri de S a u s s u r e (1829-1905) and t h e Countess d e Pour-
t a l s s , b o t h of o l d a r i s t o c r a t i c Geneva f a m i l i e s . H i s f a t h e r had t r a v e l l e d
w i d e l y and i n p a r t i c u l a r t o C e n t r a l America; s e e h i s BioZogia central;-
americana w r i t t e n w i t h t h e a s s i s t a n c e of Leo Zehntner, Adolphe P i c t e t ,
and o t h e r s , an E n g l i s h v e r s i o n of which a l s o appeared ed. by F. Du Cane
Godman and Osbert S a l v i n (London: P. H. P o r t e r , 1893-1909). For f u r t h e r
o f h i s works, s . t h e B r i t i s h Museum General CataZogue, v o l . 213, c o l l .
623, and Library of Congress CataZogue, v o l . 132, 102-3.
FdS's u n c l e , Theodore de S a u s s u r e (1824-1903), mayor of t h e c i t y o f
Genthod f o r h a l f a c e n t u r y (1850-1900), and a n i m p o r t a n t f i g u r e i n t h e
s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l l i f e of t h e French s p e a k i n g p a r t of S w i t z e r l a n d
of h i s time, was founder and p r e s i d e n t of t h e ~ o c i 6 t 6S u i s s e d e s Monuments
H i s t o r i q u e s , b u t a l s o w r o t e an Etude sur Za Zangue francaise: De 2'
orthographic des noms propres e t des noms &rangers introduits dans
k Zangue (Geneva: A. C h e r b u l i e z , 1885 ),l25 pp. A s p r e s i d e n t of t h e
S o c i 6 t 6 S u i s s e d e s A r t s h e w r o t e r e p o r t s of i n t e r n a t i o n a l e x h i b i t i o n s ,
f o r i n s t a n c e Exposition universeZZe 3878: Groupe I , Classes 1 e t 2
(ZGrich: 0. F i i s s l i , 1879), 21 pp., and Rapport sur Ze groupe XXV: Beaux-
a r t s (Schaffhausen: C . Baader, l 8 7 4 ) , 14 pp.
FdS had t h r e e younger b r o t h e r s : Horace (1859-1926), an a q u a r e l l i s t and
p a i n t e r - c f . t h e photograph of a p o r t r a i t h e made of FdS i n AnnEPHE
1964165, o p p o s i t e p . 35; ~ 6 o ~ o l(1866-1925), d one-time n a v a l o f f i c e r
and l a t e r on a s i n o l o g i s t and s p e c i a l i s t i n a n c i e n t Chinese astronomy; -
c f . h i s paper, "La cosmologie r e t l i g i e u s e en Chine, dans 1 ' I r a n e t chez
l e s p r o p h s t e s hgbreux", Actes du Congrzs international dlHistoire des
religions ( P a r i s : Champion, l 9 2 5 ) , 11, 79-92, and h i s a r t i c l e , " L ' o r i g i n e
d e s noms d e mer Rouge, mer Blanche e t mer Noire", Le Globe 63:24-36
(1925); t h e t h i r d and youngest b r o t h e r a p p e a r s t o b e t h e most i n t e r e s t i n g
w i t h r e g a r d t o FdS's l i n g u i s t i c i n t e r e s t s : Reng (1868-1943), a s s o c i a t e
p r o f e s s o r of mathematics a t t h e C a t h o l i c U n i v e r s i t y of Washington, D.C.
(1895-8) and l a t e r privat-docent and p r o f e s s o r a t Geneva and Berne Univer-
s i t i e s , p u b l i s h e d e x t e n s i v e l y , b e s i d e s a few books on n a t u r a l s c i e n c e , ,
on problems concerning t h e development and e s t a b l i s h m e n t of a n i n t e r -
n a t i o n a l language ( f r e q u e n t l y under t h e pseudonym of Antido i n a n a t t e m p t
t o overcome t h e shortcomings of o t h e r c o n s t r u c t e d languages such a s
Esperanto and I d o ) ; f o r i n f o r m a t i o n on h i s work on a r t i f i c i a l languages
s e e EncikZopedio de Esperanto (Budapest: L i t e r a t u r a Mondo, 1934/35),
.
v o l . 11, p 479, and Maurice Monnero t-Dumaine, ~ r 6 c i sd 'interzinguis tique
( P a r i s : Maloine, l96O), pp. 62, 69, 109-10. S i n c e nobody a p p e a r s t o
have drawn a t t e n t i o n t o t h i s f a c t , some of Reng's e a r l i e r p u b l i c a t i o n s
on i n t e r n a t i o n a l languages s h o u l d b e mentioned h e r e . (In fact, a s M r .
R. Haupenthal of ~ a a r b r k k e nU n i v e r s i t y informed me r e c e n t l y i n p r i v a t e
correspondence, Reng's p r o d u c t i o n i n t h i s f i e l d of r e s e a r c h was enormous) .
According t o E r n e s t K. Drezen (Historio de Za MondoZingvo [Oosaka:
P i r a t o , 19671, 189-90) and o t h e r w r i t i n g s on t h e s u b j e c t , t h e b e s t known
of Reng's s t u d i e s were EZementaZa gramatiko de Za Zingwo internaciona
kun exercaro and Teoria ekzameno de Za Zingvo Esperanto kun fonetika
internacia alfabeto (Geneva 1907 and 1910 r e s p e c t i v e l y ) b o t h of which pro-
pose modified v e r s i o n s of a l r e a d y e x i s t i n g systems t o g e t h e r w i t h e x e r c i s e s
f o r t h e i r s t u d y . Two o t h e r w r i t i n g s , Kia estas Za Zogika de Z'vorto
'grando'? of 1911 and Fundamentaj reguZoj de Za vortteorio de Esperanto
of 1915 have r e c e n t l y been r e p r i n t e d ( ~ a a r b r c c k e n : A . E. I l t i s , 1 9 6 9 ) .
See a l s o ~ e n g ' ss t u d i e s , La construction Zogique des mots en Esperanto
(Geneva 1910), and La structure logique des mots dans Zes Zangues natux-
elZes, consid6r6e au point de uue de son application aux Zangues a r t i -
ficieZZes (Berne: Impr. de Biicheler, 1918) .
The r e l a t i o n between FdS 's
l i n g u i s t i c i d e a s and t h o s e of ~ e n 6 w i l l b e t h e s u b j e c t of a s e p a r a t e
s t u d y . - I t a l s o a p p e a r s w o r t h mentioning t h a t R e d w r o t e , a t t h e
a g e of 22, a ZYzZorie des phenomznes physiques e t chimiques (Geneva:
Bureau d e s 'Archives d e s S c i e n c e s physiques e t n a t u r e l l e s ' , 1891), 47
pp., and t h a t he took h i s d o c t o r a t e a t John Hopkins U n i v e r s i t y i n 1894
w i t h a t h e s i s e n t i t l e d Sur la gZn&ation des courbes par rouzement 7 :
(Geneva: Imp. Aubert-Schuchardt, 1895), 94 pp. i'
For f u r t h e r b i o g r a p h i c a l i n f o r m a t i o n on FdS and h i s f a m i l y , s . E.-L.
Burnet ' s account i n t h e Dictionmire h i s torique e t biographique de Za
Suisse (Neuchztel 1930) V , 730-1; t h e Larousse du XXe si&?Ze ( P a r i s
1933) V I , 209; De Mauro, 1968:285-6, n.1, and 288, n.2.

The 2nd e d . , c o n s i s t i n g of 3 v o l s . ( P a r i s : Sandoz & F i s c h b a c h e r ,

1877) was reviewed by FdS i n 1878; s . ~ e c u e i z , 391-402; c f . a l s o t h e
r e f e r e n c e s t o P i c t e t i n CLG, 297, and 306-7, and CFS 17:16 (1960).
 Horace-Benedicte was p r o f e s s o r of philosophy and n a t u r a l s c i e n c e s
a t t h e Geneva Academy [ s i n c e 1876: U n i v e r s i t y ] (1762-86), which was founded
by C a l v i n i n 1559, r e c t o r of t h e same i n s t i t u t i o n (1774/75), and had
d i s t i n g u i s h e d h i m s e l f i n t h e f i e l d s of p h y s i c s and geology, and a l s o
b o t a n y , mineralogy, and o t h e r a r e a s of s c i e n t i f i c r e s e a r c h . Cf. e s p .
h i s Voyages dans Zes AZpes prGcZdes d'un Essai sur Z'histoire natureZZe
.
des environs de Genzve, 4 v o l s ( ~ e u c h z t e l - ~ e n e v a - p a r i s1779-96) .
He
became a member of t h e Royal B r i t i s h S o c i e t y i n 1788 and was a member of
many o t h e r l e a r n e d s o c i e t i e s throughout Europe.

S. CFS 17: 19 (1960) i n c o n t r a s t t o De Mauro (1968: 292) who b e l i e v e s

t h a t t h i s p a p e r was w r i t t e n i n L e i p z i g .

According t o Pedersen (1962:281-2) FdS s h a r e d t h i s d i s c o v e r y w i t h

a number of l i n g u i s t s who had q u i t e i n d e p e n d e n t l y come t o s i m i l a r con-
c l u s i o n s : K a r l Verner (1846-96), Vilhelm Thomsen (1842-1927), E s a i a s
~ 6 ~ n (1843-1928),
e r Johannes Schmidt (1843-1901), a l l of whom were more
t h a n t e n y e a r s o l d e r t h a n FdS, and Hermann C o l l i t z (1855-1935). We a r e
i n c l i n e d t o b e l i e v e O s t h o f f ' s a f f i r m a t i o n t h a t K. Verner a c q u a i n t e d t h e
L e i p z i g C i r c l e (which i n c l u d e d FdS) i n F a l l 1876 w i t h h i s f i n d i n g s concer-
n i n g t h e I n d o - I r a n i a n p a l a t a l s , and t h a t FdS and a l l German s c h o l a r s
t o o k t h e i r i n f o r m a t i o n from him; s . O s t h o f f ' s r a t h e r more polemic t h a n
i n f o r m a t i v e pamphlet, Die neueste Sprachforschung und die ErkZZrung des
indoeuropaischen Abtauts: Antwort auf ... Hermann CoZZitz (Heidelb e r g :
0. P e t t e r s , 1886), 14-20; Osthoff proposed t h a t t h i s "law" b e c a l l e d
t h e "Tegner-Thomsen-Verner'sche P a l a t a l g e s e t z " , s i n c e i t appeared impos-
s i b l e t o d e c i d e which of t h e t h r e e Scandinavians should b e g i v e n p r i o r i t y
a s none of them had p u b l i s h e d h i s f i n d i n g s (p. 2 0 ) .

FdS r e l a t e d h i s m i s g i v i n g s t o M e i l l e t ( c f . LHLG 11, 1 7 5 ) , L. G a u t i e r

( c f . B a l l y , l952:147), and i n h i s "Souvenirs" o f 1903 ( s . CFS 17: 22-4
[1960]).

Even i n 1914 t h e g r e a t Indo-Europeanist Wilhelm S t r e i t b e r g c o u l d

n o t e : "Das Buch i s t d e S a u s s u r e s Meisterwerk: noch h e u t e , nach einem
M e n s c h e n a l t e r , wirken I n h a l t und Form m i t d e r s e l b e n bezwingenden Macht
w i e am Tage d e s Erscheinens - von w i e v i e l s p r a c h w i s s e n s c h a f t l i c h e n
Werken, auch solchem hGchsten Ranges, kann man d a s G l e i c h e sagen?"
fIJ% 2: 206).
lo
The n o t i o n of system was a l r e a d y i m p l i c i t i n t h e works of Bopp
(1816) and J. Grimrn (1822) a s E. Buyssens h a s p o i n t e d o u t (CFS 18: 18-9),
though n o t i n t h e s t r i c t mathematical s e n s e which u n d e r l i e s FdS 's MGmoire.
For a f i n e s t a t e m e n t of t h e t h e o r e t i c a l i m p l i c a t i o n s of t h i s work s e e
now H j e l m s l e v ' s Language: An Introduction, t r a n s l . by F r a n c i s J . Whit-
f i e l d (Madison: Wisconsin Univ. P r e s s , 1970), 123-7.

l1 Those i n t e r e s t e d i n an a n a l y s i s of t h e main assumptions and

d e d u c t i o n s i n t h e Mgmoire may r e f e r t o A . M e i l l e t , LHLG 11, 176-7
(= Portraits of Linguists 11, 93-4), and p a r t i c u l a r l y t o W . S t r e i t b e r g
i n I& 2:103-7 (=Op. c i t . , 205-10). See a l s o Robert Schmidt-Brandt,
Die Entuieklung des indogermanischen Vokalsystems (Heidelberg: J . Groos,
l 9 6 7 ) , e s p . pp. 1-7, and William F. Wyatt, J r . , Indo-European /a/ ( P h i l a -
d e l p h i a : Univ. of Pennsylvania P r e s s , 1970), 10-12.

l2 S. t h e c o l l e c t i o n of p a p e r s from a c o n f e r e n c e devoted t o t h i s
and r e l a t e d phenomena Evidence for Laryngals ed. by Werner Winter (The
Hague: Mouton, 1965) 9-13, 35-7, 141-4, and elsewhere, and t h e i m p r e s s i v e
l i s t of p u b l i c a t i o n s on t h i s t o p i c , 44-78. S. a l s o Klaus S t r u n k ' s a r t i c l e
"Probleme d e r i d g . S p r a c h w i s s e n s c h a f t nach Brugmann", Glotta 43:199-217
(1965), e s p . 209-10, 213-4, and De Mauro, 1968: 295-6, n.5. S. a l s o
L. L. Hammerich's e x t e n s i v e review of Evidence for Laryngals i n Lingua
22:197-211 (1969).

l3 S t r e i t b e r g was f u l l of p r a i s e f o r S a u s s u r e ' s M&noire aqd observed:

"Nicht e i n z e l n e n Entdeckungen v e r d a n k t e r [FdS] s e i n e n Ruhm - s e i n e
wahre, s e i n e e i n z i g a r t i g e Bedeutung l i e g t i n d e r s y s t e m a t i s c h e n K r a f t
s e i n e s G e i s t e s . S e i n e u n v e r g l e i c h l i c h e S t g r k e i s t d i e Synthese; a l l e
Einzelbeobachtungen s i n d ihm nur B a u s t e i n e zu dem p l a n v o l l gefiigten
Gebzude d e s Systems; e r r u h t und r a s t e t n i c h t , b i s s i c h a l l e Tatsachen,
a u s i h r e r Vereinzelung e r l S s t , zu einem harmonischen Ganzen zusammen-
s c h l i e s s e n . " (IJb 2:101). Could t h i s n o t w e l l have a p p l i e d t o S a u s s u r e ' s
posthumous Cows?

l4 FdS n o t e d h i m s e l f (CFS 17: 23) t h a t Gustav Meyer (1850-1900) c o p i e d

h i s s e r i e s of t h e I E a b l a u t f o r h i s Griechische Grammatik ( L e i p z i g :
B r e i t k o p f & ~ Z r t e l ,1880), w i t h o u t acknowledging h i s s o u r c e .

l5 It i s i n t e r e s t i n g t o n o t e t h a t reviews of t h e M6moire a r e s c a r c e ;
t h e o n l y two we a r e aware of a r e t h o s e by Mikokaj Kruszewski i n RFV
4: 33-45 (1880) and Louis Havet i n Journal de Gen8ve (Febr 25, 1879) . .
L a t e r i n q u i r i e s i n a s i m i l a r d i r e c t i o n were: H e i n r i c h Hiibschmann, Das
indogermanisehe Vocalsystem (S t r a s s b u r g : Triibner, 1885) [ c f IZAS 3: .
335-61 ; F r i e d r i c h B e c h t e l , Die Hauptprobleme der indogermanischen Laut-
Zehre s e i t Schleicher ( G < t t i n g e n : Vandenhoeck Ruprecht, 1 8 9 2 ) , s . e s p .
2 1 7 f f . ; Johannes Schmidt, Kritik der Sonantentheorie (Weimar: ~ i h l a u ,
1895) [ c f . FdS 's review i n IFAnz 7: 216-8 (1897) 1; Herman H i r t , Der indo-
germanische Ablaut ( S t r a s s b u r g : Triibner, 1 9 0 0 ) .
l6 Hennann ~ d l l e who r was a t t a c k e d , t o g e t h e r w i t h FdS, by Osthoff
r e p o r t e d t h a t h e became t e m p o r a r i l y d i s c o u r a g e d i n h i s s c h o l a r l y work a s
a l i n g u i s t ( c f . t h e "Vorwort" t o h i s Semitisch und Indogermanisch, P a r t I
[Kopenhagen: Hagerup, 19061, e s p . v i i i ) , b u t i t h a s n o t y e t been e s t a b -
l i s h e d whether t h i s was FdS's r e a c t i o n a s w e l l ; c f . Godel i n CFS 17:14,
and n.9-11, and De Mauro, 1968:295-6.

l7 S. Morphologische lintersuehungen 4: 1-406; e s p . 215, n . 1; 279,

331, 364-8.

l8 However, i t i s c u r i o u s t o n o t e t h a t n e i t h e r M e i l l e t n o r S t r e i t -
b e r g make any r e f e r e n c e t o t h i s voyage, and t h e t h r e e i n f o r m a n t s who
h i n t a t S a u s s u r e ' s s t a y i n L i t h u a n i a , E r n e s t Muret, Edouard Favre, and
C h a r l e s B a l l y , w e r e a l l s t u d e n t s a t Geneva o r f r i e n d s o f h i s . I t was
a l s o n o t u n t i l t h e academic y e a r , 1 8 8 8 / 8 9 ( n o t 1 8 9 0 / 9 1 as Godel, SM, 24,
h o l d s ) t h a t S a u s s u r e o f f e r e d a n i n t r o d u c t o r y s e m i n a r on L i t h u a n i a n a t t e n d e d
by f i v e s t u d e n t s , t h e b e s t known o f whom w e r e Georges D o t t i n (1863-1928)
a n d P a u l Boyer (1864-1949).

G a u t i e r r e p o r t s S a u s s u r e ' s r e p l y : "Je me t r o u v e p l a c 6 d e v a n t un
dilemme: ou b i e n e x p o s e r l e s u j e t d a n s t o u t e s a c o m p l e x i t 6 e t a v o u e r mes
doutes, .... Ou b i e n f a i r e q u e l q u e c h o s e d e s i m p l i f i 6 , mieux a d a p t 6
2 u n a u d i t o i r e d 1 6 t u d i a n t s q u i n e s o n t p a s l i n g u i s t e s . Mais 2 c h a q u e
.
f o i s , j e m e t r o u v e arrZt6 p a r d e s s c r u p u l e s " (SM, 30) .
20 I n t h e i n t e r v i e w w i t h R i e d l i n g e r S a u s s u r e s t a t e s t h a t t h i s s u b j e c t
h a d o c c u p i e d him i n p a r t i c u l a r 1 5 y e a r s e a r l i e r ( c f . SM, 2 9 ) .

21 Some 70 p a g e s of S a u s s u r e ' s m a n u s c r i p t h a v e b e e n p r e s e r v e d ;
c f . SM 32; Godel h a s a n a l y s e d i t s c o n t e n t s i n SM, 43-6. The f u l l t e x t
i s s c h e d u l e d t o a p p e a r i n Notes i n z d i t e s personneZZes de FdS c o m p i l e d
by R. E n g l e r (Wiesbaden: 0 . H a r r a s s o w i t z , 1 9 7 2 ) ; t h r o u g h t h e k i n d o f f i c e s
of t h e e d i t o r we h a v e b e e n a b l e t o c o n s u l t t h e p r o o f s f o r t h e c h a p t e r on
Whitney ( s e e 1 . 3 . 1 ) .

22 A l t o g e t h e r 99 e x e r c i s e books i n FdS's own h a n d w r i t i n g h a v e b e e n

p r e s e r v e d ; c f . SM, 13-5, which do n o t i n c l u d e t h e s e m a n u s c r i p t s , as a g a i n s t
t h e r e f e r e n c e i n CFS 1 7 : l l (1960).

23 It was n o t u n t i l 1964 t h a t t h e l i n g u i s t i c p u b l i c was i n f o r m e d

t h a t FdS h a d d e v o t e d much t i m e t o t h e s e a r c h f o r anagrams i n p o e t r y .
B e s i d e s t h e p u b l i c a t i o n o f l e t t e r s by FdS t o Meillet which h a v e b e e n
p r e s e r v e d and which c o n t a i n a number o f p a s s a g e s d e a l i n g w i t h t h i s s u b j e c t
( s . CFS 2 1 [1964], 190-14, 117, 118-9), t h e r e was e s p e c i a l l y J e a n S t a r o -
b i n s k i ' s p r e s e n t a t i o n o f a s e l e c t i o n from F d S ' s m a n u s c r i p t s i n a n a t t e m p t
t o i n t e r p r e t FdS's endeavours w i t h i n t h e framework of p o e t i c t h e o r y .
S. h i s a r t i c l e s , "Les anagrammes d e FdS1', Mercure de France 350:243-62
( F e b r . 1 9 6 4 ) ; i d . , "Les mots s o u s l e s mots: T e x t e s i n 6 d i t s d e FdS",
To Honor Roman Jakobson 111, 1906-17 (1967); i d . , "Le t e x t e dans l e
t e x t e : E x t r a i t s i n g d i t s d e s C a h i e r s d'anagrammes d e FdS", TeZ QueZ No.
37, 3-33 ( S p r i n g 1 9 6 9 ) , and "La p u i s s a n c e d e 1 ' A p h r o d i t e e t l e mensonge
d e s c o u o i s s e s : FdS l e c t e u r d e ~ u c r & e " , La poztique, Za mgmoire (= Change,
6 ) ( P a r i s : Ed. d u S e u i l , 1 9 7 0 ) , 89-90 [ I n t r o d u c t i o n ] , 91-117; s . a l s o
M i t s o u on at's a r t i c l e , "Vers une l e c t u r e d e s anagrammes p a r l a t h g o r i e
s a u s s u r i e n n e " , Zoc. c i t . , 119-26. S t a r o b i n s k i ' s p u b l i c a t i o n s have been
f o l l o w e d b y a number o f f u r t h e r w r i t i n g s ; s . f o r i n s t a n c e Aldo R o s s i ' s
p a p e r , I I G l i anagrammi d e S a u s s u r e : P o l i z i a n o , Bach, P a s c o l i " , Paragone
218:113-27 ( A p r i l 1 9 6 8 ) , and G i u s e p p e Nava's p r e s e n t a t i o n " L e t t r e s d e
FdS ?iG i o v a n n i P a s c o l i " , CFS 24:73-81 ( 1 9 6 8 ) , e s p . 80-1. I n 1969, J u l i a
K r i s t e v a p u b l i s h e d h e r e s s a y , "Pour une s e m i o l o g i e d e s paragrammes",
i n K r i s t e v a , 1969: 174-207, i n which s h e a t t e m p t s a n a n a l y s i s of t h e s e
p o e t i c d e v i c e s i n view of FdS's s u g g e s t i o n s c o n c e r n i n g s e m i o t i c s ; s.
e s p . 174-5.

24 M o u r e l l e - ~ e m a ' s (1969:4) d a t e s a r e wrong a s i s much o f h i s i n f o r -

m a t i o n ; s. o u r f o r t h c o m i n g r e v i e w o f t h e Geneva SchooZ Reader i n VR 30.
1.2 The Intellectual Paradigm of Saussure's Formative Years
I

The i n t e l l e c t u a l l i f e of the nineteenth

century was more complex than t h a t of
any previous age. This was due t o sev-
eral causes. First: the area concerned
was larger than ever before; AmeKca and
Russia made important contributions, and
Europe became more m a r e than formerly
of Indian phiZosophies, both ancient and
modern. Second: science, which had been
a chief source of novelty since the seven-
teenth century, made new conques,ts,
especiaZZy i n geo Zogy, biology, and
organic chemistry. . ..
B e r t r a n d R u s s e l l i n 1945
*

1.2.1 The Question of E x t r a - L i n g u i s t i c I n f l u e n c e s on S a u s s u r e

In der Geschichte der Wissenschaft kommt

es wohZ vor, dass Einer so nebenher einen
wichtigen, fo Zgenreichen ~edankenaus -
spricht, den e r s t v i a l spzter e i n Anderer
ausbeutet .
Und dieser Andere kann eben-
sogut s e Zbs tzndiger Entdecker, a l s von
Jenem angeregt gewesen sein.
Georg von d e r Gabelentz i n 1891
t

Leonard Bloomfield n o t e d i n 1924 i n h i s review of t h e second e d i t i o n

of t h e Cours t h a t most of what S a u s s u r e had p u t forward had l o n g b e e n ' i n
t h e a i r ' b u t o n l y f r a g m e n t a r i l y e x p r e s s e d u n t i l t h e n , g i v i n g him f u l l
c r e d i t f o r t h e r i g o r o u s s y s t e m a t i z a t i o n of fundamental p r i n c i p l e s of
language i n v e s t i g a t i o n (Bloomfield, 1970:106). He s t a t e d i n t h e same
review t h a t " i n l e c t u r i n g on ' g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s ' h e [FdS] s t o o d v e r y
n e a r l y a l o n e , f o r , s t r a n g e a s i t may seem, t h e n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y , which
s t u d i e d i n t e n s i v e l y t h e h i s t o r y of one f a m i l y of languages, took l i t t l e
o r no i n t e r e s t i n t h e g e n e r a l a s p e c t s of human speech" ( i d . . To b e
s u r e Bloomfield i s r e f e r r i n g t o t h e second h a l f of t h e 1 9 t h c e n t u r y and
i n p a r t i c u l a r t o t h e work i n Indo-European l i n g u i s t i c s done a f t e r t h e 1870s;
h e a f f i r m e d about t e n y e a r s l a t e r t h a t t h e " f i r s t g r e a t book on g e n e r a l
l i n g u i s t i c s was a t r e a t i s e on t h e v a r i e t i e s of human speech by Wilhelm
von Humboldt (1767-1835), which appeared i n 1836" (1933:18). But Bloom-
f i e l d n o t e d a l s o t h a t t h e r e had been a d e f i n i t e d e c l i n e of emphasis on
g e n e r a l language t h e o r y from Humboldt t o Heymann S t e i n t h a l (1823-99),
George von d e r Gabelentz (1840-93) and t h e work of t h e p h i l o s o p h e r and
p s y c h o l o g i s t Wilhelm Wundt (1832-1920), a n o b s e r v a t i o n which was made
more e x p l i c i t by Franz Specht f i f t e e n y e a r s l a t e r : "Die a l l g e m e i n e
S p r a c h w i s s e n s c h a f t , d i e i h r e n B l i c k Cber das Indogermanische h i n a u s
auch auf den Bau d e r fibrigen Sprachen d e r Erde r i c h t e t , i s t i n d e r
F r i i h z e i t d e r indogermanischen S p r a c h w i s s e n s c h a f t w e i t s t s r k e r g e p f l e g t
worden a l s i n den J a h r e n nach 1870", adding t h a t t h e "grossen Umw2ilzungen,
d i e damals e i n t r a t e n , haben auch d i e s e n Wissenszweig verkiirmnern l a s s e n " .
(1948:260). Specht adds t h e names of a few l i n g u i s t s of t h a t p e r i o d
who c o n t i n u e d t h e Humboldtian t r a d i t i o n w i t h i t s p a r t i c u l a r i n t e r e s t
i n g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s : Franz M i s t e l i (1841-1903), Steinthal's pupil,
Franz Nikolaus Finck (1867-1910), and Hugo Schuchardt (1842-1927).
What Bloomfield d i d n o t i n d i c a t e , a p a r t from an u n s p e c i f i e d r e f e r e n c e
t o t h e psychologism of t h a t t i m e (1933: 16-8) i n which h e saw t h e major
weakness of Hermann P a u l ' s t r e a t m e n t of h i s t o r i c a l l i n g u i s t i c s , and
which can o n l y r a r e l y b e found i n w r i t i n g s on t h i s p e r i o d d e a l i n g w i t h
t h e h i s t o r y of l i n g u i s t i c s ( c f . Pedersen, 1962 o r S t r u n k , l 9 6 5 ) , h a s a t
l e a s t b e e n h i n t e d a t by Specht. He s t a t e s : "Uberblickt man den Z e i t a b -
s c h n i t t von den Junggrammatikern b i s zum Ausbruch des e r s t e n W e l t k r i e g e s ,
s o i s t e r i n s e i n e n Anschauungen v E l l i g zeitgebunden. Die V o r h e r r s c h a f t
d e r N a t u r w i s s e n s c h a f t e n z e i g t s i c h sowohl i n dem B e g r i f f e w i e auch i n dem
r e i n e n P o s i t i v i s m u s und H i s t o r i s m u s d e r Zeit1'.(1948:260). Specht b e l i e v e d
t h i s temporary o n e s i d e d n e s s was most s u c c e s s f u l a t t h a t time, b u t h e was
a l s o aware t h a t t h e main l i n e s of language i n v e s t i g a t i o n had been narrowed
down t o ( h i s t o r i c a l ) phonology and morphological a n a l y s i s .
T h i s emphasis on t h e a n a l y t i c a l d e s c r i p t i o n of language d a t a indepen-
dent of t h e o r i g i n a l meaning of t h e formal p r o p e r t i e s under i n v e s t i g a t i o n -
which was p a r a l l e l e d i n s y n c h r o n i c l i n g u i s t i c s by American s t r u c t u r a l i s m
between 1926 (Bloomfield's P o s t u Z a t e s ) and t h e p u b l i c a t i o n of Chomsky's
S y n t a c t i c S t r u c t u r e s i n 1957 - dppears t o have been v e r y c h a r a c t e r i s t i c
of t h e p e r i o d between 1876 and 1916, e . g . t h e s t a t e m e n t s of Verner concer-
n i n g ' e x c e p t i o n s ' of t h e Germanic consonant s h i f t , of Brugmann p e r t a i n i n g
t o t h e e x i s t e n c e of n a s a l s w i t h s y l l a b i c f u n c t i o n i n IE, and L e s k i e n ' s
c l a i m t h a t 'sound l a w s ' a l l o w f o r no e x c e p t i o n ( a l l of 1876) and t h e
completion of t h e second e d i t i o n of Brugmann and Delbr3ck1s voluminous
G r u n d r i s s i n 1916. Wolfgang Putschke h a s r e c e n t l y r e s t a t e d t h e main
r e a s o n f o r p a r t i c u l a r developments i n 1 9 t h c e n t u r y l i n g u i s t i c s p o i n t i n g
o u t t h a t throughout t h i s t i m e language i n v e s t i g a t o r s used t o f o l l o w w i t h
s p e c i a l i n t e r e s t t h e f i n d i n g s of t h e n a t u r a l s c i e n c e s i n o r d e r t o view
language s t u d y w i t h i n t h e framework of t h e i r methods and r e s u l t s . It i s
w e l l known t h a t F r i e d r i c h von S c h l e g e l ( c f . Arens, 1969:162), J . G r i m
(198), Humboldt (179), and more n o t a b l y Bopp (219), p a i d much a t t e n t i o n
t o comparative anatomy, and P u t s c h k e b e l i e v e s t h a t t h e c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n
of language a s a ( l i v i n g ) organism had i t s s o u r c e i n t h i s i n t e r e s t (1969:
22). It a p p e a r s t h a t t h e r e were two d i v e r g i n g i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s of t h e
organism concept: t h e h u m a n i s t i c ("geisteswissenschaftliche") advocated
by Humboldt, and t h e s c i e n t i f i c ("naturwissenschaftliche") p u t forward
by Bopp who n o t e d , a s e a r l y a s i n 1836: "Die Sprachen s i n d a l s o r g a n i s c h e
N a t u r k a r p e r anzusehen, d i e nach bestimmten Gesetzen s i c h b i l d e n " ( s .
Putschke, 1969:23). The e v o l u t i o n of t h e neogrammarian p o s i t i o n of t h e
s e v e n t i e s , however, had i t s s o u r c e i n t h e d i s c o v e r y of t h e f i r s t Germanic
consonant s h i f t by Rask and G r i m m which l e d Bopp and h i s f o l l o w e r s t o
the ever growing b e l i e f t h a t l i n g u i s t i c change must obey laws s i m i l a r
t o t h o s e which govern n a t u r a l phenomena.
From a b o u t t h e middle of t h e c e n t u r y onwards psychology ( e . g . S t e i n -
t h a l ) made i t s i n f l u e n c e f e l t on l i n g u i s t i c s t u d y , and soon a f t e r w a r d s
Darwin's t h e o r y of e v o l u t i o n was h a i l e d by August S c h l e i c h e r (1821-68)
a s a major breakthrough which had i t s impact on t h e e x p l a n a t i o n of
language change. The emphasis on t h e v o c a l s i d e of language, charac-
t e r i s t i c of t h e whole of 1 9 t h c e n t u r y l i n g u i s t i c s , l e d , t o g e t h e r , we
b e l i e v e , w i t h t h e i n t e r e s t i n comparative anatomy (and l a t e r a l s o b i o l o g y ) ,
/

t o p h y s i o l o g i c a l i n v e s t i g a t i o n s of l a n g u a g e , Putschke does n o t seem

aware of t h e e x i s t e n c e of a voluminous s t u d y by K a r l M o r i t z Rapp (1803-
1
1883) which appeared d u r i n g t h e $ e a r s 1836-41, and which J e s p e r s o n
p r a i s e d f o r i t s p h o n e t i c o b s e r v a t i o n s and i t s thorough comprehension
of t h e mutual r e l a t i o n s of sounds and w r i t i n g (1922:70), and t h u s h e
t e n d s t o b e l i e v e (1969~23-4) t h a t i n t h i s r e s p e c t Rudolf von Raumer's
2
s t u d y Aspiration und Lautverschiebung (1837) marked t h e f i r s t i m p o r t a n t
s t e p towards p h y s i o l o g i c a l e x p l a n a t i o n of language change which reached
i t s f i r s t culminating' p o i n t i n GrundzEge der PhysioZogie und Systematik
der SprachZauta (1856) by t h e Viennese p h y s i o l o g i s t E r n s t Wilhelm R i t t e r
von B r k k e (1819-92). Briicke's s t u d y was followed by C a r l M e r k e l ' s
(1812-76) voluminous book Anatomie und PhysioZogie des menschlichen
3
Stim-undSprachorgans (1857). S i m i l a r s t u d i e s p e r t a i n i n g t o physio-
l o g i c a l , p h y s i c a l and a c o u s t i c i n v e s t i g a t i o n s of t h e human v o i c e were
p u b l i s h e d e x t e n s i v e l y d u r i n g t h e second h a l f of t h e 1 9 t h c e n t u r y , and
even i n 1909 Hermann Gutzmann (1865-1922) w r o t e a PhysioZogie der Stirrune
und Sprache. Of major importance a p p e a r t o h a v e been t h e experiments
by t h e p h y s i c i s t Hermann Ludwig Ferdinand von Helmholtz (1821-94) whose
Lehre von den Tonenpfindungen appeared i n 1863 and which was t r a n s l a t e d
i n t o E n g l i s h by Alexander John E l l i s (1814-90) i n 1875 from t h e t h i r d
German e d i t i o n . About t h e same time P a u l Broca (1824-80) localized the
speech c e n t r e i n t h e t h i r d l e f t f r o n t a l c o n v o l u t i o n of t h e human b r a i n
( c f . CLG, 2 6 ) , a d i s c o v e r y which n e u r o l i n g u i s t s of today s t i l l f i n d
v a l u a b l e i n many r e s p e c t s .
Another s c i e n c e which c o n s t i t u t e d a f u r t h e r component of t h e i n -
t e l l e c t u a l paradigm of t h e 1 9 t h c e n t u r y was psychology. V i c t o r Egger
p u b l i s h e d h i s e s s a y of d e s c r i p t i v e psychology La Parole intgrieure i n
1881, i n v e s t i g a t i n g t h e r e l a t i o n between t h o u g h t and language, and
phenomena connected w i t h s u b v o c a l i s a t i o n a l m o s t a decade b e f o r e t h e
appearance of The Principles of PsychoZogy (1890) by William James (1842-
1910) which became very i n f l u e n t i a l a b o u t 1900 when much a t t e n t i o n was
g i v e n t o v a r i o u s a s p e c t s of language a c q ~ i s i t i o n .P~s y c h o - l i n g u i s t i c
s t u d i e s aroused continued i n t e r e s t i n t h e years following t h e p u b l i c a t i o n
of Wundt's f i r s t volume of h i s VijZkerpsychologie e n t i t l e d Die Sprache
/

i n 1900: A l b e r t Thumb (1865-1915) p u b l i s h e d , t o g e t h e r w i t h K a r l Marbe,

a p s y c h o l o g i s t , e x p e r i m e n t a l r e s e a r c h e s t o s u b s t a n t i a t e f o r m a t i o n s by
analogy i n language (1901), ~ d d a r dM a r t i n a k ' s PsychoZogische Unter-
suchungen zur Bedeutungslehre (1901), Ottmar D i t t r i c h ' s voluminous
Grundziige der SprachpsychoZogie (1903) , ~ u ~ s n e - ~ e r n aLeroy
rd 's Le Langage
7
(1905) w r i t t e n by a p h y s i c i a n b u t touching upon l i n g u i s t i c problems,
and t h e Principes de Zinguistique psychoZogique (1907) by Jacobus van
Ginneken (187 7-1945) .
Apart from t h e n a t u r a l s c i e n c e s which had much i n f l u e n c e on l i n -
g u i s t i c s i n t h e 1 9 t h c e n t u r y ( a s they do t o d a y ) , t h e growth of t h e s o c i a l
s c i e n c e s and p h i l o s o p h i c a l s p e c u l a t i o n s s h o u l d n o t b e overlooked. There
i s i n p a r t i c u l a r Auguste Comte (1798-1857) whose voluminous Cows de
phizosophie positive (1830-42; 5 t h ed. 1893) h a s been r e p r i n t e d d u r i n g
more t h a n f i f t y y e a r s and h a s had a d e f i n i t e i n f l u e n c e on t h e develop-
ment of t h e hunan s c i e n c e s of t h e 1 9 t h c e n t u r y , i n p a r t i c u l a r philosophy,
s o c i o l o g y , h i s t o r y , and t h u s on l i n g u i s t i c s a s w e l l s i n c e i t h a s always
been a r e f l e c t i o n of t h e i n t e l l e c t u a l t r e n d s of contemporary i d e a s .
Positivism - which K a r l V o s s l e r (1872-1949) attacked so violently i n
1 9 0 4 ~- was c l o s e l y l i n k e d t o h i s t o r i c i s m , a n o t h e r f e a t u r e of t h e l a t e
19th century. S i g n i f i c a n t l y , t h e f i r s t t h r e e volumes of Revue de Zin-
guistique e t de phi ZoZogie comparze ( P a r i s 1867-70) were sub t i t l e d
"Recueil t r i m e s t r i e l de documents pour s e r v i r 2 l a s c i e n c e p o s i t i v e
des langues, 2 l'ethnologie, 2 l a mythologie e t 5 l ' h i s t o i r e " .
Apart from V o s s l e r ' s r e a c t i o n a g a i n s t p o s i t i v i s t philosophy and i t s
a p p l i c a t i o n t o l i n g u i s t i c s , opposition t o t h e p r i n c i p a l 19th century
t e n e t s grew d u r i n g t h e e a r l y y e a r s of t h e 20th c e n t u r y , a f t e r many y e a r s
of i n c u b a t i o n which saw Got t l o b Frege ' s (1848-1925) GrundZagen der Arith-
metik (1884), Henri Adrien N a v i l l e ' s (1845-1930) f i r s t l o g i c a l s t u d y
De Za CZassification des sciences ( l 8 8 8 ) , Wilhelm Windelband's (1848-
1915) Geschichte der PhiZosophie (1892; 1 3 t h ed., 1935) and Benjamin
Bourdon's (1860-193?) book LrExpression des Zmotions e t des tendences
duns Ze Zangage (1892). H e i n r i c h R i c k e r t (1863-1936) made t h e i m p o r t a n t
d i s t i n c t i o n between t h e s o c i a l and t h e n a t u r a l s c i e n c e s showing t h a t
l i n g u i s t i c s belonged t o t h e former i n h i s monograph KuZtumissenschaft
/

und Natumissenschaft (1899; 7 t h ed., 1926), and new t r e n d s were announced

i n t h e w r i t i n g s of Alexius Meinong R i t t e r von Handschuchsheim (1853-
1920) , F r i t z Mauthner 's (1849-1923) Beitriige zu einer K r i t i k der Sprache
(1901-2; 2nd e d . , 1906-131, and o t h e r s , b u t a l s o i n Benedetto C r o c e ' s
(1866-1952) famous Estetica come scienza d e l l f espressione e Zinguistica
generaze (1902) which l e d t o t h e f o r m a t i o n of t h e i d e a l i s t i c s c h o o l of
t h e " N e o l i n g u i s t s " i n I t a l y and a p a r a l l e l neo-Humboldtian movement i n
Germany d u r i n g t h e t w e n t i e s and t h i r t i e s . The Untersuchungen zur Grund-
Zegung der allgemeinen Grmnmatik und Sprachphilosophie (1908) by Anton
Marty (1847-1914) and volume two of H e i n r i c h Gomperzl (1873-1942) Weltan-
schauungslehre e n t i t l e d NooZogie of t h e same y e a r might b e added, i n par-
t i c u l a r b e c a u s e of Roman Jakobson's r e c e n t s u g g e s t i o n (1965:22) t h a t t h e
l a t t e r could have d i r e c t l y i n f l u e n c e d S a u s s u r e ' s concept of t h e l a n g u a g e
si g n .
S i n c e t h e mapping o u t of t h e c u l t u r a l c l i m a t e i n which F. d e
S a u s s u r e grew up i s only one p a r t of o u r p r e s e n t s t u d y , t h e above s k e t c h
which does n o t amount t o much more t h a n a l i s t i n g of b i b l i o g r a p h i c a l
d a t a cannot b e regarded a s very s a t i s f a c t o r y . I t s u g g e s t s , however,
something which i s s t i l l a b s e n t from modern " h i s t o r i e s " of l i n g u i s t i c
s c i e n c e such a s p r e s e n t e d by Mounin, Lepschy, Leroy, ~ r a u r / W a l d , ~ v i c ,
and many o t h e r s : t h a t a s e r i o u s p r e s e n t a t i o n of t h e development of l i n -
g u i s t i c s d u r i n g t h e p a s t c e n t u r i e s h a s t o t a k e i n t o account t h e s o c i a l ,
c u l t u r a l , and s c i e n t i f i c , and probably a l s o t h e p o l i t i c a l and economic
c i r c u m s t a n c e s and e v o l u t i o n s of a g i v e n p e r i o d . Robins' Short History
of Linguistics of 1967 a p p e a r s t o b e t h e o n l y n o t a b l e e x c e p t i o n i n t h i s
r e s p e c t ; i t a t t e m p t s t o i n t e g r a t e some of t h e c o n s i d e r a t i o n s which Thomas
S. Kuhn p u t forward i n h i s Structure of S c i e n t i f i c RevoZutions (1962;
2nd ed., 1970) f o r t h e e x p l a n a t i o n of t h e e v o l u t i o n of l i n g u i s t i c
thought. I n o r d e r t o e s t a b l i s h a more complete p i c t u r e of t h e i n t e l l e c t u a l
atmosphere of t h e p e r i o d between 1870 and 1910 which i s v i t a l t o t h e
e x p l a n a t i o n of i n f l u e n c e s on ~ a u s s u r e ' si d e a s about t h e n a t u r e of l a n g u a g e
i t w i l l b e n e c e s s a r y f o r t h e h i s t o r i o g r a p h e r of l i n g u i s t i c s c i e n c e t o
10
l e a r n from t h e h i s t o r i a n whose domain i s t h e h i s t o r y of i d e a s .
 * B. R u s s e l l , A History of Western PhiZosophy (New York: Simon &
S c h u s t e r , 1945), p. 719.

' G. von d e r Gabelentz, Die Sprachwissenschaft, 2nd r e v . ed.

( L e i p z i g : C . H. T a u c h n i t z , 1901), p . v .

Versuch einer PhysioZogie der Sprache nebst tdstorischer E n h i c k -

Zung der abendZCndischen Idiome nach physioZogischen Grundsctxen ( S t u t t -
g a r t & Tiibingen: C o t t a ) , v o l s . I (1836), I1 (1839), 111 (1840)', and
I V (1841).
L
Putschke does n o t mention t h a t t h i s s t u d y by Raumer (1815-76)
was much ahead of h i s t i m e and t h a t many of h i s o b s e r v a t i o n s had t o b e
r e d i s c o v e r e d i n t h e 60s and 70s of t h e 1 9 t h c e n t u r y . The monograph
Die Aspiration und die Lautverschiebung: Eine sprachgeschichtZiche Unter-
suchung, h a s been r e p r i n t e d (Hildesheim: Gerstenberg, 1 9 7 0 ) , x v i + 104
PP

'See M e r k e l t s review of Briicke, 1856 i n Schmidt's Jahrbiicher der

in- und aus Endischen gesamten Medizin 95: 108-15 (1857), and Briicke's
r e p l y , "Phonetische Bemerkungen", Z f O G 8:749-68 of t h e same y e a r .
4
"Remarques s u r l e s i s g e de l a f a c u l t 6 du l a n g a g e a r t i c u l g s u i v a n t
une o b s e r v a t i o n d1aph6mie ( p e r t e d e l a p a r o l e ) " , Bulletin de Za Societz
anatomique ( P a r i s ) v o l . 36, N.S. 6 , 331-57 (Aug. 1861&, ande"Nouvelles
o b s e r v a t i o n s d'aphgmie p r o d u i t e s p a r une l g s i o n d e s 2 e t 3 c i r c o n -
v o l u t i o n s f r o n t a l e s " , ibid., 398-407 (Nov. 1861).

Cf. Wilhelm Ament's book, Die EntwickZung von Sprechen und Denken
beim Kinde (Leipzig: Wunderlich, 1 8 9 9 ) , v i i + 213 pp.

ti Ercperimentelle Untersuchungen iiber die psychoZogischen Grundlagen

der sprachlichen ~naZogiebiZdungen( L e i p z i g : Engelmann, 1901), 87 pp;
c f . H. S c h u c h a r d t ' s review i n LGRP 23, c o l l . 393-400 (1902). S. a l s o
f u r t h e r s t u d i e s by Thumb, "Psychologische S t u d i e n iiber d i e s p r a c h l i c h e
A n a l o g i e b i l d u n g , " I F 22, 1-55 (1907/08), and "Experimentelle P s y c h o l o g i e
und S p r a c h w i s s e n s c h a f t : Ein B e i t r a g z u r Methodenlehre d e r P h i l o l o g i e " ,
GRM 3, 1-15, 65-74 (1911).

Le Langage: Essai sur Za psychoZogie normale e t pathologique de

c e t t e fonction ( P a r i s : Alcan, 1905), 293 pp.

Positivismus und Ideatismus i n der Sprachwissenschaft: Eine spmch-

phiZosophische Untersuchung (Heidelberg: Winter, 1 9 0 4 ) , 98 pp.

43
 .
S Vber Annahmen ( L e i p z i g : B a r t h , 1902) , xv + 298 pp; 2nd e d . ,
1910, and Uber d i e ErfahrungsgrundZagen unseres Wissens ( B e r l i n : S p r i n g e r ,
1 9 0 6 ) , 1 1 3 p p . , and f i n a l l y Dber MijgZichkeit und Wahrscheinlichkeit:
Beitrzge zur Gegenstandstheorie und Erkenntnistheorie ( L e i p z i g : B a r t h ,
l 9 l 5 ) , x v i + 760 pp.
10
I n t h i s respect it appears expedient t o consult s t u d i e s such a s
F r i e d r i c h H e e r ' s InteZZectuuZ History of Europe, t r a n s l . by J o n a t h a n
S t e i n b e r g (London: W e i d e n f e l d & N i c o l s o n , 1 9 6 6 ) , e s p . 449-76 ( on t h e
1 9 t h c e n t u r y ) ; B e r t r a n d R u s s e l l ' s History of Western PhiZosophy (New
York: Simon & S c h u s t e r , 1945) i s much t o o b r i e f i n i t s a c c o u n t o f t h e
" C u r r e n t s o f Thought i n t h e N i n e t e e n t h Century" (719-29) t o y i e l d a
comparable b e n e f i t . C f . a l s o t h e Introduction of t h i s s t u d y ( 0 . 0 ) f o r
s u g g e s t i o n s on how a h i s t o r i o g r a p h y of l i n g u i s t i c t h o u g h t s h o u l d b e
established.
 45

1.2.1.1 Durkheimfs P r i n c i p l e s o f S o c i o l o g y , T a r d e r s S o c i o l o g i c a l
and Economic T h e o r i e s , > and S a u s s u r e ' s A l l e g e d S o c i o l o g i s m

Der soziale Charakter der SprachentwickZung

i s t n i e wirklich verkannt geuorden; er wwde
nur eine zeitZang durch das j u n g g r m a t i s c h e
Dogma verdunkelt. Wenn man b e i der Sprache
von Gesetzen reden w i l l , so kBnnen es n w
sozioZogische s e i n ...
Hugo Schuchardt i n 1925

(Hugo Schuchardt-Brevier, 2 0 6 )

Auguste Comte i s t h e o r i g i n a t o r of t h e term "sociology"; h e devoted

t h e f o u r t h volume of h i s Cows de philosophie positive t o s o c i o l o g i c a l
philosophy o u t l i n i n g t h e p r i n c i p l e s a c c o r d i n g t o which s o c i o l o g i c a l
1
i n v e s t i g a t i o n s s h o u l d proceed. However, h i s e n c y c l o p e d i c approach which
made s o c i o l o g y a p a r t of h i s p o s i t i v i s t philosophy b u t n o t a s u b j e c t
i n i t s own r i g h t could n o t s a t i s f y Emile Durkheim (1858-1917) who i s
r i g h t l y c a l l e d t h e founder of s o c i o l o g y a s a s c i e n c e . I n France e s p e c i a l l y
much a t t e n t i o n was g i v e n t o s o c i o l o g i c a l i s s u e s towards t h e end of t h e
1 9 t h c e n t u r y , t o t h e e x t e n t t h a t Durkheim was induced t o r e c o r d t h a t
s o c i o l o g y enjoyed much p o p u l a r i n t e r e s t . With h i s RPgZes de Z
u dthode
socioZogique ( P a r i s l 8 9 5 ) , Durkheim l a i d t h e f o u n d a t i o n f o r s o c i o l o g i c a l
t h e o r y d i s t i n c t from o t h e r s o c i a l s c i e n c e s such a s psychology and a n t h r o -
pology
The s t u d e n t of S a u s s u r e ' s Cows who r e c e i v e d h i s i n i t i a t i o n i n t o t h e
l i n g u i s t i c c o n c e p t s o u t l i n e d i n t h i s book from t h e h i s t o r i e s of l i n g u i s t i c s
which have appeared d u r i n g t h e p a s t decade o r s o w i l l f i n d h i s a f f i r m a t i o n s
confirmed t h a t S a u s s u r e was much exposed t o Durkheim's t h e o r y of s o c i o l o g y
when h e developed h i s p r i n c i p l e s of language d e s c r i p t i o n . In fact there
a r e a number of s t a t e m e n t s i n t h e Cows which seem t o p o i n t t o s u c h a
contention. I t i s however t h e aim of t h i s c h a p t e r t o c o n t e s t such a
g e n e r a l l y h e l d view. The p r o c e d u r e we s h a l l f o l l o w i s , f i r s t t o l o c a t e
t h e p a s s a g e s i n t h e Cours which t r e a t s o c i a l a s p e c t s of language and
a s s e s s t h e i r meaning and t h e o r e t i c a l v a l u e , and second t o compare S a u s s u r e ' s
statements with ~ u r k h e i m ' s s o c i o l o g i c a l concepts.
I n t h e c h a p t e r which d e a l s w i t h t h e o b j e c t of l i n g u i s t i c s c i e n c e a
number of f o r m u l a t i o n s of t h e f o l l o w i n g kind can b e found: " . . . la
l a n g u e e s t une i n s t i t u t i o n s o c i a l e " (CLG, 3 3 ) ; Zangage, embracing langue
and p a r o l e , " a un c z t 6 i n d i v i d u e l e t un c Z t 6 s o c i a l " ( 2 4 ) ; langue r e p r e s e n -
t i n g " l a p a r t i e s o c i a l e du langage" (31) i s opposed t o p a r o l e which
is s a i d t o be "toujours individuelle" (30). Apart from t h i s o p p o s i t i o n
Zangue: p a r o l e = i n d i v i d u a l : s o c i a l which we can deduce from t h e p a s s a g e s
quoted above, t h e r e a r e a number of f u r t h e r i n s t a n c e s where ~ a u s s u r e
employed t h e n o t i o n of "socio", though i n a more c o n c r e t e s e n s e , i . e .
no l o n g e r merely i n t e r m i n o l o g i c a l c o n t r a s t w i t h " i n d i v i d u a l " , but i n
r e s p e c t t o t h e mechanism of language e v o l u t i o n . For i n s t a n c e , when
h e d e a l s w i t h t h e i m m u t a b i l i t y of t h e language s i g n , h e n o t e s : "La
langue -- . . . --est $ chaque moment l ' a f f a i r e d e t o u t l e monde", and
11
une c h o s e [!I dont t o u s l e s i n d i v i d u s s e s e r v e n t t o u t e l a journge" (107).
S i n c e language i s i n c o n s t a n t u s e by t h e members of a speech community,
i t i s exposed t o unceasing i n f l u e n c e on t h e p a r t of a l l of them. This
f a c t , S a u s s u r e m a i n t a i n s , s u f f i c e s t o show t h a t no r e v o l u t i o n i n language
i s p o s s i b l e , emphasizing t h a t language i s of a l l s o c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n s l e a s t
amenable t o i n d i v i d u a l i n i t i a t i v e s i n c e i t i s t i e d up w i t h t h e l i f e of
s o c i e t y ('masse s o c i a l e " ) which i t s e l f a p p e a r s t o b e a p a r t i c u l a r l y con-
s e r v a t i v e f o r c e owing t o t h e n a t u r a l i n e r t i a of i t s members ( c f . CLG,
107-8).
To t h e i m p a r t i a l r e a d e r t h e s e o b s e r v a t i o n s concerning t h e s o c i a l
c h a r a c t e r of language do n o t amount t o much more t h a n common-place s t a t e -
ments about t h e n a t u r e of l a n g u a g e , Similarly, t h e following s h o r t
quotations appear t o contain nothing p a r t i c u l a r l y s t r i k i n g . Thus S a u s s u r e
s p e a k s a t one time of t h e " f a i t s o c i a l [!I d e l a langue" ( 2 9 ) , of t h e
II
l i e n s o c i a l que c o n s t i t u e l a langue" ( 3 0 ) ; h e f u r t h e r i n s i s t s t h a t
language i s independent of t h e i n d i v i d u a l s p e a k e r ( 3 7 ) , and t h a t i t
e x i s t s o n l y "en v e r t u d'une s o r t e de c o n t r a t p a s s 6 e n t r e l e s membres
d e l a communaut6". ( 3 1 ) . S a u s s u r e emphasizes t h a t language n e v e r e x i s t s ,
c o n t r a r y t o i t s appearance, o u t s i d e what h e terms t h e " f a i t s o c i a l " ( 1 1 2 ) ,
a d d i n g t h a t language i s a s e m i o l o g i c a l phenomenon, and concludes t h a t
s o c i a l f o r c e s , i n p a r t i c u l a r , a f k e c t language and c a u s e l i n g u i s t i c changes
(113).
I n o r d e r t o support our contention t h a t Saussure's observations
r e g a r d i n g t h e s o c i a l n a t u r e of language were common knowledge among
l i n g u i s t s of h i s time, we may simply l o o k t o B l o o m f i e l d ' s I n t r o d u c t i o n
t o t h e Study of Language of 1914. I n h i s e a r l y work Bloomfield a f f i r m s
t h a t language i s l e a r n e d and t h a t , c o n s e q u e n t l y , t h e i n d i v i d u a l ' s language
"is n o t h i s c r e a t i o n , b u t c o n s i s t s of h a b i t s adopted i n h i s e x p r e s s i v e
i n t e r c o u r s e w i t h o t h e r members of t h e community" ( 1 7 ) . Bloomfi'eld con-
c l u d e s from t h i s f a c t t h a t t h e i n d i v i d u a l i s u n a b l e t o u s e l a n g u a g e
e x c e p t i n t h e form i n which t h e community a s a whole u s e s i t ; "moreover
t h e i n d i v i d u a l s p e a k e r must s p e a k a s t h e o t h e r s do, o r h e w i l l n o t b e
understood" ( i b i d . ). A s f o r t h e change which o c c u r s i n language, h e
h o l d s t h a t i t i s "never a c o n s c i o u s a l t e r a t i o n by i n d i v i d u a l s , b u t a n
unconscious, g r a d u a l change i n t h e h a b i t s of t h e e n t i r e community" ({bid.).
Apart from t h e p s y c h o l o g i c a l terms i n which Bloomfield used t o e x p r e s s
h i s i d e a s d u r i n g t h e e a r l y p a r t of h i s academic c a r e e r , we d e t e c t s t r i k i n g
s i m i l a r i t i e s between t h e s t a t e m e n t s of someone s t r o n g l y i n f l u e n c e d by
Wundtian psychology ( c f . Bloomfield, 1 9 1 4 : v i ; 1 9 3 3 : v i i ) and t h o s e of
S a u s s u r e who a l l e g e d l y was under t h e n o t i c e a b l e i n f l u e n c e of Durkheimian
sociology.
Thus t h e f o l l o w i n g p a s s a g e from t h e Cowls, whose f a c t u a l i n f o r m a t i o n
does n o t amount t o much more t h a n t h a t which w e have found i n t h e q u o t a t i o n
from Bloomfield, h a s been t a k e n t r a d i t i o n a l l y a s a n i n d i c a t i o n of S a u s s u r e ' s
dependence on Durkheim's c o n c e p t i o n of " c o n t r a i n t e s o c i a l e " which imposes
i t s e l f on t h e i n d i v i d u a l u s e r of a g i v e n language: " . . . si l'on veut
dgmontrer que l a l o i admise dans une c o l l e c t i v i t g e s t une chose que l ' o n
s u b i t , e t non une r s g l e l i b r e m e n t c o n s e n t i e , c ' e s t b i e n l a l a n g u e q u i
3
e n o f f r e l a preuve l a p l u s 6 c l a t a n t e 1 ' (CLG, 104; c f . CLG(E), 1 5 9 ) .
These q u o t a t i o n s and p o s s i b l y a few more s c a t t e r e d throughout t h e
Corns have l e d a number of l i n g u i s t s i n t h e post-Saussurean e r a t o e x p r e s s
t h e i r b e l i e f t h a t Saussurean l i n g u i s t i c s was e s s e n t i a l l y s o c i o l o g i c a l
i n n a t u r e and t h a t Durkheim's s o c i o l o g i c a l t h e o r i z i n g was S a u s s u r e ' s
main s o u r c e of i n s p i r a t i o n . Joseph Vendryes (1875-1960), a p u p i l of
M e i l l e t , summarized h i s impressi'on i n 1921 i n t h e f o l l o w i n g way: "De l a
l e c t u r e de son l i v r e [ i . e . t h e Cow?s], on emporte l a f o r t e i m p r e s s i o n
que l a l i n g u i s t i q u e [ s a u s s u r i e n n e ] e s t e s s e n t i e l l e m e n t s o c i o l o g i q u e . 114

Vendryes claimed t o have found e v i d e n c e i n t h e Corns f o r h i s con-

t e n t i o n t h a t s o c i o l o g i c a l n o t i o n s underlay S a u s s u r e ' s famous d i c h o t o m i e s
of langue/paroZe and synchrony/diachrony ( s . Vendryes, 1952: 19 r e s p . 22)
w i t h o u t , however, g i v i n g any q u o t a t i o n t o s u p p o r t h i s views. For Vendryes
however t h e phenomenon of analogy, f o r i n s t a n c e , 'lest reg16e p a r d e s
c a u s e s s o c i a l e s " (1952: 24) , a n a s s e r t i o n h e could n o t have t a k e n from
t h e Cours which c l e a r l y s t a t e s : " ~ ' a n a l o g i e e s t d ' o r d r e psychologique"
(CLG, 226). I t a p p e a r s t h a t Vendryes, a p u p i l of M e i l l e t , had n o t r e a d
t h e Corns very c l o s e l y b u t had i n t e r p r e t e d h i s f i n d i n g s i n t h e l i g h t of
5
M e i l l e t ' s t e a c h i n g s which showed a marked Durkheimian i n f l u e n c e .
Vendryes, i t should b e n o t e d , d i d n o t mention Durkheim i n h i s 1921
paper; t h i s was done t e n y e a r s l a t e r by Witold Doroszewski (1899 - )
i n a paper e n t i t l e d " S o c i o l o g i e et L i n g u i s t i q u e : Durkheim e t Saussure"
which h e r e a d on t h e o c c a s i o n of t h e Second I n t e r n a t i o n a l Congress of
L i n g u i s t s h e l d i n Geneva i n 1 9 3 1 . ~ There Doroszewski p u t forward h i s
c o n v i c t i o n t h a t S a u s s u r e had been under t h e n o t i c e a b l e i n f l u e n c e of
Durkheimian s o c i o l o g y and t h a t Saussurean i d e a s were "de provenance
e x t r a l i n g u i s tique", a c o n t e n t i o n which, i n t e r e s t i n g l y enough, was r e j e c t e d
by M e i l l e t (A[B]CIL,147) i n t h e d i s c u s s i o n which followed ~ o r o s z e w s k i ' s
lecture. It should b e r e c a l l e d t h a t M e i l l e t h i m s e l f , a former s t u d e n t
o f S a u s s u r e a t P a r i s (1881-91) and l a t e r temporary c o l l a b o r a t o r of Durkheim
( 1 9 0 2 f f . ) , was much i n f l u e n c e d by Durkheimian n o t i o n s . This f a c t is
e v i d e n t from M e i l l e t 's own w r i t i n g s , and a l s o from t h o s e of h i s p u p i l s ,
i n p a r t i c u l a r Vendryes, Marcel Cohen (1884 - ) , Alf Sommerfelt (1892-
8
1965), and Ernile Benveniste (1902 - ) .
On t h e o t h e r hand, i t would seem t h a t Doroszewski's f i n d i n g s con-
c e r n i n g Durkheim's i n f l u e n c e h a v e been a c c e p t e d a s e s t a b l i s h e d f a c t by
t h e m a j o r i t y of a u t h o r s of books r e l a t e d t o t h e h i s t o r y of l i n g u i s t i c s
and t h e r e f o r e cannot e a s i l y b e r e j e c t e d . Louis Kukenheim m a i n t a i n s t h a t
/

t h e i n f l u e n c e of Durkheim on M e i l l e t and S a u s s u r e i s u n d e n i a b l e (1966:99);

a c c o r d i n g t o R. H. Robins, S a u s s u r e was much i n f l u e n c e d by Durkheim's
s o c i o l o g i c a l t h e o r y t o t h e extenk t h a t h e "perhaps e x a g g e r a t e d t h e s u p r a -
p e r s o n a l r e a l i t y of langue o v e r and above t h e i n d i v i d u a l , more e s p e c i a l l y
a s h e r e c o g n i z e d t h e changes i n langue proceed from changes made by t h e
i n d i v i d u a l s i n t h e i r parole, w h i l e h e y e t d e c l a r e d t h a t langue was n o t
s u b j e c t t o t h e i n d i v i d u a l ' s power of change".(1967:200f.). F. P . Dinneen,
t a k i n g S a u s s u r e ' s dependence on Durkheimian concepts f o r g r a n t e d , s t a t e s
e x p l i c i t l y t h a t S a u s s u r e , d i s s a t i s f i e d w i t h t h e argument t h a t o n l y h i s -
t o r i c a l l i n g u i s t i c s was r e g a r d e d by contemporary l i n g u i s t s a s s c i e n t i f i c ,
"did n o t s e e how a s t u d y t h a t does n o t t a k e t h e h i s t o r i c a l development of
language i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n could b e made more a c c u r a t e u n t i l h e became
a c q u a i n t e d w i t h t h e work of Emile DurkheimU.(1967:192). I n o t h e r words,
Dinneen h o l d s 1 ) t h a t S a u s s u r e developed h i s concept of synchrony o n l y
a f t e r h e had come t o know Durkheimian s o c i o l o g y , and 2) t h a t h i s s o u r c e
o f i n f o r m a t i o n l a y o u t s i d e t h e f i e l d of l i n g u i s t i c s . Our c l a i m i s t h a t
we can, a t t h e p r e s e n t s t a g e o f o u r s t u d y , a t l e a s t r e f u t e t h e f i r s t
c o n t e n t i o n ; t h e second w i l l b e d e a l t w i t h more e x p l i c i t l y i n chap. 1.3.1.
Suffice it t o note t h a t t h e opposition descriptive vs. h i s t o r i c a l l i n -
g u i s t i c s had been common knowledge s i n c e t h e 1860s and 70s, though i t
had n o t been t a k e n t o i t s l o g i c a l c o n c l u s i o n ( c f . T e l e g d i , 1 9 6 7 ) . This
d i s t i n c t i o n was c l e a r l y made by S a u s s u r e i n h i s e a r l y t e a c h i n g s a s M e i l l e t
s t r e s s e d i n 1913 i n h i s o b i t u a r y of S a u s s u r e - and i t s h o u l d b e emphasized
t h a t M e i l l e t was n o t a c q u a i n t e d w i t h t h e c o n t e n t s of S a u s s u r e t s l e c t u r e s
on g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s - s t a t i n g t h a t h e " v o u l a i t s u r t o u t b i e n marquer
l e c o n t r a s t e e n t r e deux mani&es de c o n s i d g r e r l e s f a i t s l i n g u i s t i q u e s :
l t 6 t u d e de l a l a n g u e 2 un moment don&, e t l ' g t u d e du dgveloppement
l i n g u i s t i q u e 2 t r a v e r s l e temps". (LHLG 11, 183) . Although S a u s s u r e l e f t
P a r i s i n 1891 t o assume t h e p r o f e s s o r s h i p of Indo-European l i n g u i s t i c s
a t Geneva U n i v e r s i t y w i t h o u t e v e r having p u b l i s h e d a n y t h i n g r e l a t e d
s p e c i f i c a l l y t o general l i n g u i s t i c theory, t h e r e a r e i n d i c a t i o n s t h a t h e
developed t h i s d i s t i n c t i o n a s e a r l y a s i n t h e 1880s, and i n any c a s e
p r i o r t o t h e p u b l i c a t i o n of Durkheim's ~ z g l e sde Za m6thode socioZogique
9
i n 1895.
 Dinneen, however, t r i e s a t some l e n g t h (1967:192-5) to relate certain
p r i n c i p l e s of Durkheim's d o c t r i n b i n o r d e r t o s u g g e s t S a u s s u r e ' s depen-
dence, concluding: "When we examine some of d e S a u s s u r e ' s d i s t i n c t i v e
c o n t r i b u t i o n s t o t h e s t r u c t u r a l approach t o language we c a n a p p r e c i a t e
how much t h e s e i d e a s of ~ u r k h e i m ' s i n f l u e n c e d him". (195). Dinneen f a i l s
i n t h e subsequent c h a p t e r devoted t o S a u s s u r e (195-210) t o p r o v i d e any
e v i d e n c e f o r h i s c l a i m ; h e q u o t e s no p a s s a g e from t h e Corns t o s u p p o r t
h i s c o n t e n t i o n , and a s r e s u l t h e i s l e d t o make a s s e r t i o n s of t h e f o l l o w i n g
kind: "In summary . . . de S a u s s u r e saw a s t h e s o l e o b j e c t of l i n g u i s t i c
s c i e n c e t h a t a s p e c t of language which c o r r e s p o n d s t o a s o c i a l f a c t " (199),
a n argument which we b e l i e v e i s w i t h o u t f o u n d a t i o n . I n f a c t , Dinneen
s u g g e s t s t h a t langue i s t h a t a b s t r a c t i o n which conforms w i t h t h e Durkheimian
n o t i o n of " f a i t s o c i a l " , b u t a g a i n does n o t u n d e r s c o r e h i s c o n t e n t i o n
10
w i t h a p a s s a g e from t h e Cows.
However, i n view of t h e f a c t t h a t a number of s t r o n g c l a i m s have
been made by h i s t o r i a n s of l i n g u i s t i c s c i e n c e which m a i n t a i n t h e depen-
11
dence of S a u s s u r e ' s l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y on Durkheim's p r i n c i p l e s of s o c i o l o g y ,
i t a p p e a r s t o b e n e c e s s a r y t o have a c l o s e r l o o k a t Durkheim's i n f l u e n t i a l
t r e a t i s e Les R2gZes de l a mgthode sociologique which f i r s t appeared i n 1895
12
and h a s e v e r s i n c e been regarded a s a c l a s s i c i n t h e a r e a of s o c i o l o g y .
Durkheim, who i s g e n e r a l l y h e l d t o b e t h e founder of s o c i o l o g y , e x p r e s s e d
i n t h e P r e f a c e t o t h e second e d i t i o n t h a t h e wished t o e s t a b l i s h s o c i o l o g y
a s a s c i e n c e which could b e p l a c e d "dans l ' e s p r i t o; sont physiciens,
c h i m i s t e s , p h y s i o l o g i s t e s , quand i l s s ' e n g a g e n t dans une r g g i o n , e n c o r e
i n e x p l o r 6 e Y d e l e u r domaine s c i e n t i f i q u e " (p. x i x ) , adding t h a t t h e
i n v e s t i g a t o r s h o u l d b e aware of t h e f a c t t h a t e n t e r i n g t h e s o c i a l world
means t o e x p l o r e t h e unknown. The o b j e c t i v e of s o c i o l o g i c a l s c i e n c e
would b e t o a s s e s s s o c i a l f a c t s .
I n t e r e s t i n g l y Durkheim d e f i n e d t h e f a i t social i n t h e f o l l o w i n g
manner: Est f a i t social t o u t manizre, f i x z e ou non, susceptible d'
exercer sur l ' i n d i v i d u une contrainte extibieure; ou b i e n e n c o r e , [une
chose] qui e s t g&&aZe dans lr&tendud'une soci6t6 donnze toute ayant
une existence propre, indzpendente de ses manifestations individue2Ze.s"
(14). Durkheim added t o h i s i n i t i a l d e f i n i t i o n , i n which h e does n o t
speak of c o n c e p t s b u t of c h o s e s , t h a t t h e f a i t s o c i a l a c t u a l l y e n u n c i a t e s
a s a t h i n g something which i s no;hing b u t "une vue d ' e s p r i t " (19).
An i m p o r t a n t element of Durkheim's t h e o r y i s t h e n o t i o n of s o c i a l
c o n s t r a i n t ; l3 s o c i a l f a c t o r s e x e r c i s e a p a r t i c u l a r kind of p r e s s u r e on
t h e i n d i v i d u a l member of a g i v e n s o c i a l community which, Durkheim o b s e r v e s ,
i s n o t due t o t h e " r i g i d i t 6 d e c e r t a i n e s arrangements m o l & u l a i r e s ,
mais a u p r e s t i g e dont s o n t i n v e s t i e s c e r t a i n e s r e p r 6 s e n t a t i o n s " (p. x x i ) ,
a s t a t e m e n t w i t h t h e h e l p of which Durkheim wishes t o make i t c l e a r t h a t
s o c i o l o g y does n o t d e a l w i t h t h i n g s i n t h e m a t e r i a l i s t i c s e n s e (such
a s t h e n a t u r a l s c i e n c e s a r e concerned w i t h ) b u t w i t h a b s t r a c t i o n s which
a r e o n l y v e r i f i a b l e and n o t i c e a b l e i n s o f a r a s t h e y e x e r c i s e c o n s t r a i n t .
I n t h i s c o n n e c t i o n i t i s s i g n i f i c a n t t h a t Durkheim emphasized t h a t a l l
k i n d s of ( s o c i a l ) behaviour ( i n c l u d i n g language) , or thinking are,
though o u t s i d e t h e i n d i v i d u a l h i m s e l f , n e v e r t h e l e s s endowed w i t h an
i m p e r a t i v e and c o e r c i v e power and t h r u s t themselves on him whether h e
l i k e s i t o r n o t , exemplifying i t i n t h e f o l l o w i n g manner:

Le systsme d e s i g n e s d o n t j e me s e r s pour exprimer ma pensge,

l e systsme de monnaies que j 'emploie pour payer mes d e t t e s ,
l e s i n s t r u m e n t s d e c r G d i t que j ' u t i l i s e dans mes r e l a t i o n s
commerciales, l e s p r a t i q u e s s u i v i s dans ma p r o f e s s i o n , e t c . 14
e t c . , f o n c t i o n n e n t indgpendamment d e s usages que j ' e n f a i s ( 4 ) .

For t h e i n d i v i d u a l , t h e monetary system o r t h e l i n g u i s t i c code i s something

which e x i s t s i n d e p e n d e n t l y of him, b u t which r e s t r i c t s h i s l i b e r t y when
h e wishes t o u s e t h e s e systems i n commercial e n t e r p r i s e o r communication.
It s h o u l d b e emphasized t h a t Durkheimian s o c i o l o g y does n o t d e a l
with things i n t h e material sense, but with representations, i . e . things
a s mental c o n c e p t i o n s ( c f . German "Vorstellung"). T h e r e f o r e Durkheim
cannot b u t p l a c e t h e s o c i a l f a c t s i n t h e c o l l e c t i v e c o n s c i o u s n e s s ("con-
s c i e n c e c o l l e c t i v e " ) which s h o u l d n o t b e confused w i t h t h e c o n s c i o u s n e s s
of t h e i n d i v i d u a l which i s a r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of a n o t h e r kind ( c f . R s g l e s
. . . , xvii). The c o l l e c t i v e c o n s c i o u s n e s s , h e concedes, may b e r e g a r d e d
as h a v i n g a p s y c h i c e x i s t e n c e (128); t h i s c o l l e c t i v e c o n s c i o u s n e s s ,
Durkheim e x p l a i n e d i n 1898, however, can o n l y make i t s e l f f e l t o r become
15
a c t i v e through t h e medium of t h e p a r t i c u l a r c o n s c i o u s n e s s of i n d i v i d u a l s .
 A s we have shown a t t h e b e g i n n i n g of t h i s c h a p t e r , t h e r e a d e r of t h e
I

C o w s w i l l f i n d t h a t a p p a r e n t l y S a u s s u r e d i d make i n h i s l e c t u r e s a number
of s t a t e m e n t s (among many o t h e r s , of c o u r s e ) about t h e n a t u r e of language
which seem t o make u s e of c e r t a i n Durkheimian n o t i o n s :
1 ) Language i s once d e f i n e d a s "un p r o d u i t s o c i a l de l a f a c u l t ; du
langage" (CLG, 25); Zangage a s such (and, a t times, Langue) i s c h a r a c t e r i z e d
a s a " f a i t s o c i a l " (CLG, 29 as a g a i n s t 1 1 2 ) ;
2) l a n g u a g e i s s a i d t o b e "un systsme de s i g n e s d i s t i n c t s c o r r e s p o n d a n t
5 d e s i d g e s d i s t i n c t s " ( 2 6 ) , and more p a r t i c u l a r l y a "systsme de s i g n e s
a r b i t r a i r e s " (106) , and f u r t h e r , something which may a p p e a r even more
"Durkheimian" ,
3) l a n g u a g e i s s a i d t o e x i s t l1indgpendante d e l ' i n d i v i d u " (37) and
"extgrieure .
2 l ' i n d i v i d u " (31) 1 6
From t h e s e and o t h e r q u o t a t i o n s from t h e Cours which we c i t e d i n t h e
f i r s t h a l f of t h i s c h a p t e r most h i s t o r i a n s of l i n g u i s t i c s c i e n c e h a v e
concluded t h a t S a u s s u r e ' s l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y i s e s s e n t i a l l y Durkheimian
i n nature. We c o n t e s t t h i s , and s h a l l a t t e m p t t o prove o u r p o i n t i n t h e
following paragraphs.
The f i r s t o b s e r v a t i o n t h a t should b e made i s concerned w i t h termino-
logical matters. I n Durkheim's s o c i o l o g i c a l t h e o r y a t l e a s t two terms
a r e of prime importance: 1) "contrainte sociale" - t h e n o t i o n by means
of which h e d e f i n e s t h e s o c i a l f a c t - and 2) t h e concept o f "repr&en-
tation". There i s no t e x t u a l i n d i c a t i o n t h a t S a u s s u r e developed a t h e o r y
17
b a s e d on e i t h e r t h e n o t i o n of c o n s t r a i n t o r t h e concept of r e p r e s e n t a t i o n .
We may assume t h a t S a u s s u r e was q u i t e aware of t h e f a c t t h a t t h e i n d i v i d u a l
s p e a k e r was r e s t r i c t e d t o t h e ( l i n g u i s t i c ) code of t h e speech community
i n o r d e r t o b e understood, s i n c e h e c h a r a c t e r i z e d langue a s "l'ensemble
des habitudes l i n g u i s t i q u e s q u i permettent 2 un s u j e t d e comprendre e t
d e s e f a i r e comprendre" (CLG, 1 1 2 ) , b u t t h e r e i s no i n d i c a t i o n t h a t
h e e n v i s a g e d a l i n g u i s t i c p r i n c i p l e based on t h e n o t i o n of c o n s t r a i n t .
On t h e c o n t r a r y , h e n o t e d on s e v e r a l o c c a s i o n s t h e i n d i v i d u a l ' s l i b e r t y
i n t h e speech a c t ( p a r o l e ; c f . CLG, 172) . We have found o n l y two i n s t a n c e s
where S a u s s u r e used t h e word ' r e p r & e n t a t i o n l (CLG, 32 and 9 8 ) . I n both
c a s e s r e p r e s e n t a t i o n h a s no p a r t i c u l a r t e c h n i c a l meaning a t t a c h e d t o i t ,
though i t a p p e a r s t o imply what i s meant by t h e German e x p r e s s i o n "Vor-
stellung"; i n a d d i t i o n , t h e r e a i e no s o u r c e s f o r e i t h e r of t h e two occur-
r e n c e s of t h e term ( c f . CLG(E), 44 and 1 4 9 ) . The b e s t example i s perhaps
S a u s s u r e ' s a f f i r m a t i o n t h a t a phoneme o r an "image a c o u s t i q u e " i s n o t
i d e n t i c a l w i t h sound (which i s p u r e l y p h y s i c a l ) , b u t i t s "empreinte
psychique". T h i s o b s e r v a t i o n , however, would n o t l e a d back t o Durkheim's
concept b u t t o s t a t e m e n t s made by Baudouin de Courtenay d u r i n g t h e 1890s
( c f . 1.3.3.2).
Our second o b s e r v a t i o n i s t h a t s t a t e m e n t s concerning t h e s o c i a l
n a t u r e of language, langue a s a f a i t s o c i a Z , e t c . do n o t c o n s t i t u t e ,
anywhere i n t h e whole of t h e Cowls, a n i n t e g r a l p a r t of S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r y ,
b u t t h a t p a s s i n g r e f e r e n c e s can b e found o n l y i n t h e f o l l o w i n g c h a p t e r s :
"Ob j e t d e l a l i n g u i s t i q u e " (CLG, 23-35) , "Linguistique de l a langue e t
l i n g u i s t i q u e d e l a p a r o l e " (36-9), and "1mmutabilit6 e t m u t a b i l i t g du
s i g n e " (104-13); t h e o n l y e x c e p t i o n a p p e a r s t o b e on p. 21 (though t h e
CLG(E), p. 2 1 does n o t confirm t h i s ) , where t h e a u t h o r a s k s whether
l i n g u i s t i c s s h o u l d b e i n c o r p o r a t e d i n t o s o c i o l o g y , s i n c e language (Zangage)
i s a s o c i a l f a c t , b u t proposes t o answer i t i n t h e c h a p t e r s t o f o l l o w .
T h i s f a c t h a s been s t r e s s e d , b e c a u s e i t i s i n t h e i n t r o d u c t o r y a s
w e l l a s i n t h e c e n t r a l p a r t s t h a t S a u s s u r e makes e x p l i c i t r e f e r e n c e s t o
W. D. Whitney: h e n o t e s t h a t Whitney had a s s i m i l a t e d langue w i t h a s o c i a l
i n s t i t u t i o n (CLG, 26), b u t c r i t i c i z e s him f o r h i s c o n t e n t i o n t h a t i t was
p u r e l y a c c i d e n t a l t h a t language i s v o c a l ( s i n c e , f o r S a u s s u r e , t h i s i s
p r e c i s e l y i t s s p e c i f i c c h a r a c t e r i s t i c i n c o n t r a s t t o o t h e r s i g n systems),
a g r e e i n g w i t h him however on a n o t h e r i s s u e : "Mais s u r l e p o i n t e s s e n t i e l ,
l e l i n g u i s t e a m e r i c a i n [= Whitney] nous semble a v o i r r a i s o n : l a langue
e s t une convention" (CLG, 26; c f . a l s o SM, 143-8 [ p a s s i m ] ) . Whitney i s
moreover p r a i s e d f o r h i s i n s i s t e n c e on t h e a r b i t r a r y n a t u r e of t h e l i n -
g u i s t i c s i g n , b u t i s a l s o c r i t i c i z e d f o r n o t having s e e n t h a t i t i s t h i s
f a c t t h a t s e p a r a t e s language from a l l o t h e r human i n s t i t u t i o n s (CLG, 1 1 0 ) .
I n p a r t i c u l a r , i n view of t h e f a c t t h a t r e f e r e n c e s t o o t h e r a u t h o r s a r e
s c a r c e i n t h e Cowls, t h e s e q u o t a t i o n s a r e s u r e l y n o t a c c i d e n t a l b u t
s u g g e s t t h a t S a u s s u r e may have r e c e i v e d h i s i n s p i r a t i o n concerning t h e
s o c i a l c h a r a c t e r of language more p r o b a b l y from Whitney ( s . 1.3.1)
t h a n from any o t h e r s o u r c e , a n a s p e c t which we should l i k e t o emphasize
I

a l r e a d y a t t h i s p o i n t a t t h e r i s k of a n t i c i p a t i n g an i m p o r t a n t f e a t u r e
of o u r argument t h a t e x t r a l i n g u i s t i c i n f l u e n c e s which have f r e q u e n t l y
been s u g g e s t e d a r e a t b e s t m a r g i n a l i n S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r e t i c a l framework.
T h i r d , t h e r e a r e n o t more t h a n about two dozen o c c u r r e n c e s of t h e
term ' s o c i a l ' i n t h e Corns a s a g a i n s t 138 o c c u r r e n c e s of t h e e x p r e s s i o n
'system'.18 T h i s r a t i o may s u g g e s t t h a t , a s f a r a s S a u s s u r e was concerned,
t h e s o c i a l a s p e c t of language remained comparatively m a r g i n a l i f compared
with its systematic character.
I n a d d i t i o n , i t s h o u l d b e n o t e d t h a t 8 m o s t of t h e p a s s a g e s quoted
from t h e Cours c o n t a i n i n g t h e e x p r e s s i o n " s o c i a l " have been t a k e n o u t of
c o n t e x t , a procedure which may w e l l l e a d t o a f a l s e i m p r e s s i o n o r a t
l e a s t permit v a r i o u s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s . When S a u s s u r e s t a t e s t h a t language
i s a s o c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n h e makes e x p l i c i t r e f e r e n c e t o t h e f a c t t h a t
language i s based on a "consentement c o l l e c t i f " (CLG, 3 2 ) , h a s i t s s o u r c e
i n t h e I t 6 s p r i t c o l l e c t i f " (19) of a g i v e n community, and e n j o y s a "usage
c o l l e c t i f " (173). T h i s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c i s a l s o s h a r e d by i n s t i t u t i o n s
o t h e r t h a n language, and S a u s s u r e e x p l a i n s : "En e f f e t t o u t moyen d '
e x p r e s s i o n r e c u dans une s o c i 6 t 6 r e p o s e en p r i n c i p e s u r une h a b i t u d e
c o l l e c t i v e ou, c e q u i r e v i e n t a u mzme, s u r l a convention" (CLG, 1 0 0 f . ) .
I n o t h e r words, language i s l e a r n e d and c o n v e n t i o n a l ( 2 5 ) . Interestingly,
t h e term ' c o l l e c t i v e ' a p p e a r s o f t e n i n c o n t e x t s where ' s o c i a l ' might w e l l
b e expected, s i n c e ' c o l l e c t i v e ' p e r t a i n s t o langue ( s . 38, a s ' s o c i a l ' ,
19
c f . 24, 30) a s ' i n d i v i d u a l ' r e f e r s t o parole (24, 27, 29-31, 27, 28, 1 3 8 ) .
Fourth, t h e e q u a t i o n langue: parole = i n d i v i d u a l : s o c i a l does n o t
c o n s i s t e n t l y h o l d t r u e i n S a u s s u r e ' s t e a c h i n g s on g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s .
It may w e l l b e t h a t t h i s e q u a t i o n h a s b e e n complicated by t h e f a c t t h a t
S a u s s u r e employed t h r e e d i s t i n c t terms: langage, langue and parole.
A s f o r t h e f i r s t term, h e noted: "Le l a n g a g e a un c S t 6 i n d i v i d u e l e t un
c c t 6 s o c i a l , e t l ' o n n e p e u t c o n c e v o i r l ' u n s a n s l ' a u t r e " (CLG, 2 3 ) ,
b u t does n o t seem t o have drawn t h e c o n c l u s i o n from t h i s s t a t e m e n t t h a t
would mean a ) t h a t langue h a s i t s e x i s t e n c e o n l y i n t h e "masse p a r l a n t e " ,
and b ) t h a t parole i s l i m i t e d by t h e code of language ( c f . CLG, 3 1 ) .
On t h e o t h e r hand, S a u s s u r e d i d n o t always c h a r a c t e r i z e Zangue a s t h e
s o c i a l a s p e c t , and indeed h e observed on o c c a s i o n t h a t " l e l a n g a g e e s t
s o c i a l , il e s t v r a i , mais pour nombre d e f a i t s , il e s t p l u s commode d e
l e r e n c o n t r e r dans l ' i n d i v i d u " (LTS, 3 0 ) , b u t a l s o " l a l a n g u e e s t f o r c e -
ment s o c i a l e ; l e l a n g a g e n e l ' e s t p a s forcement" ( i b i d . ) . A t times
S a u s s u r e himself i d e n t i f i e d Zangage and langue ( s . LTS, 30-1; SM, 157-8)
and complicated m a t t e r s f u r t h e r by a t t a c h i n g d i f f e r e n t meanings t o a l l
t h r e e e x p r e s s i o n s i n t h e c o u r s e of h i s t e a c h i n g s between 1891 and 1911,
as Godel h a s shown ( c f . SM, 142-59 [ p a s s i m ] ) . I n f a c t , Godel a f f i r m s t h a t
S a u s s u r e , a t t h e t i m e of h i s f i r s t c o u r s e on g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s ( i n 1 9 0 7 ) ,
c h a r a c t e r i z e d p a r o l e a s t h e eminently s o c i a l s i d e of language (SM, 146-7).
T h i s a p p a r e n t v a c i l l a t i o n i n t h e u s e of ' s o c i a l ' may b e e x p l a i n e d by t h e
s i m p l e f a c t t h a t S a u s s u r e n e v e r w r o t e a c o h e r e n t system of l i n g u i s t i c
t h e o r y h i m s e l f ; i t may a l s o i n d i c a t e t h a t h e , f a i t h f u l t o h i s dictum:
"c'est l e p o i n t d e vue q u i c r g e l ' o b j e t " (CLG, 23) ,20 n e v e r used ' s o c i a l '
and ' i n d i v i d u a l ' a s t e c h n i c a l terms b u t a t t a c h e d a r a t h e r g e n e r a l meaning
t o them which would change w i t h t h e a n g l e from which h e viewed l i n g u i s t i c
phenomena.
F i f t h , a p a r t from t h e f a c t t h a t S a u s s u r e employed t h e e x p r e s s i o n s
' s o c i a l ' and ' i n d i v i d u a l ' i n a r a t h e r g e n e r a l everyday s e n s e u s i n g them
as o p p o s i t e terms t o c l a r i f y h i s Zangue/parole distinction, a distinction
h e d i d n o t i n t r o d u c e b e f o r e 1907 ( c f . Godel, 1966:489), t h e g e n e r a l u s e
of ' s o c i a l ' should b e explored. We h a v e a l r e a d y noted t h a t S a u s s u r e
made u s e of ' s o c i a l ' i n c o n t e x t s where h e wished t o e x p r e s s t h a t l a n g u a g e
had i t s e x i s t e n c e o n l y by v i r t u e of a g i v e n speech community (hence t h e
f r e q u e n t c o l l o c a t i o n s of langue w i t h 'c o l l e c t i v i t 6 ' , 'conscience c o l l e c t i v e ' ,
'usage c o l l e c t i f ' , ' e s p r i t c o l l e c t i f ' , 'consentementcollectif', and s i m i l a r
expressions). The o t h e r e x p r e s s i o n S a u s s u r e c o l l o c a t e s ' s o c i a l ' w i t h i s
'convention'; language i s f o r S a u s s u r e ( a s f o r Whitney b e f o r e him) "une
chose a c q u i s e a t c o n v e n t i o n n e l l e " ( ~ ~25).
~, F i n a l l y , when d i s c u s s i n g
t h e phenomenon of l i n g u i s t i c change, S a u s s u r e o b s e r v e s t h a t language
b l e n d s w i t h t h e l i f e of s o c i e t y and i s s u b j e c t e d t o i t s i n e r t i a which
a p p e a r s a s a prime c o n s e r v a t i v e f o r c e ( c f . CLG, 1 0 8 ) . He r i g h t l y a s s e r t s
t h a t language e v o l u t i o n s t a r t s w i t h p a r o l e ( s . CLG, 37 and 1 3 8 ) , b u t
/

m o d i f i c a t i o n s t o b e e s t a b l i s h e d i n t h e language system i n t r o d u c e d by
t h e i n d i v i d u a l s p e a k e r have t o b e adopted by t h e speech community.
I n t h i s r e s p e c t , S a u s s u r e h o l d s , ' langue and parole a r e i n t e r d e p e n d e n t ,
a l t h o u g h they c a n n e v e r t h e l e s s b e r e g a r d e d a s s e p a r a t e e n t i t i e s ( s .
CLG, 37-8).
S i x t h , t h e r e i s a f u r t h e r a s p e c t of S a u s s u r e ' s u s e of ' s o c i a l '
which r e q u i r e s a t t e n t i o n , i n p a r t i c u l a r s i n c e i t l e a d s more d i r e c t l y
t o h i s l i n g u i s t i c theorizing. Language i s s o c i a l n o t o n l y b e c a u s e i t i s
s e t up by a g i v e n community, a "masse s o c i a l e " (CLG, lO4), and b e c a u s e
i t e x i s t s o n l y i n t h e c o l l e c t i v i t y of t h e "masse p a r l a n t e " (112), b u t
a l s o owing t o i t s communicative n a t u r e ( s . FdS's s p e c i a l u s e of t h e
E n g l i s h word " i n t e r c o u r s e " , CLG, 2 8 1 f f . ) . S a u s s u r e t h e r e f o r e emphasizes
t h e s y s t e m i c c h a r a c t e r of langue d e f i n i n g i t a s a system of a r b i t r a r y
s i g n s ( s . CLG, 106; c f . a l s o pp. 24, 32, 33, 43, 116, 182; SM, 278, and
LTS, 50 [ 'syst&ne ( d e s i g n e s ) 'I), a code (CLG, 31, 47, and 107; LTS. 1 6 ) ,
and a s e m i o l o g i c a l phenomenon (CLG, 33-4, 100-1, 111-2). It i s w i t h
t h e l a t t e r a s p e c t of language t h a t we a r e p a r t i c u l a r l y concerned i n t h e
present discussion. S a u s s u r e a p p e a r s t o have claimed t h a t language i s
a s o c i a l f a c t j u s t b e c a u s e o f i t s s e m i o l o g i c a l c h a r a c t e r (CLG, 1 1 2 ) .
I t i s a p p a r e n t from t h e Cows t h a t S a u s s u r e envisaged a s c i e n c e
which was t o s t u d y a l l k i n d s of s i g n systems (CLG, 33) n o t o n l y w r i t i n g
systems, a r t i f i c i a l languages, and t h e language of deaf-mutes (Ill),
b u t a l s o r i t e s , customs ( 3 5 ) , forms of p o l i t e n e s s , m i l i t a r y s i g n s ( 3 3 ) ,
and s i m i l a r c o n v e n t i o n a l codes. I t would b e t h e t a s k of t h e l i n g u i s t
t o d e f i n e "ce q u i f a i t d e l a l a n g u e un syst$me s p e c i a l dans l ' e n s e m b l e
d e s f a i t s semiologiques" ( i b i d . ) . When S a u s s u r e c a l l s language a s o c i a l
i n s t i t u t i o n i t i s e s p e c i a l l y b e c a u s e h e d e f i n e s Zangue a s a system of
a r b i t r a r y o r c o n v e n t i o n a l s i g n s , s i g n s which o r i g i n a t e i n human c o n v e n t i o n
( c f . CLG, 100-1).
The concept of semiology o r s e m i o t i c s ( a s i t i s more o f t e n c a l l e d
t o d a y ) , which h a s become v e r y f a s h i o n a b l e i n r e c e n t y e a r s ( s . t h e works
by B a r t h e s , Merleau-Ponty, K r i s t e v a , and P r i e t o , f o r i n s t a n c e ) , a p p e a r s
t o have been developed r a t h e r e a r l y i n S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r i z i n g a b o u t t h e
n a t u r e of language, a l t h o u g h no e v i d e n c e can b e produced t h a t h e b e l i e v e d
/

i n t h e e a r l y s t a g e s of h i s l i n g u i s t i c thought t h a t " l e problsme l i n g u i s t i q u e

e s t a v a n t t o u t semiologique" (CLG, 3 4 ) . However, a s e a r l y a s 1894 S a u s s u r e
d i d speak a b o u t a "semiologie p a 1 r t i c u l i & e d i t e langage" (SM, 4 6 ) , and
m a n u s c r i p t s which appear t o r e p r e s e n t s k e t c h e s f o r a book on l i n g u i s t i c s
which S a u s s u r e contemplated w r i t i n g d u r i n g t h e same y e a r show t h a t h e
i n t e n d e d t o d e v o t e a f u l l c h a p t e r t o semiology ( c f . SM, 37, and e s p . 4 9 ) .
Apart from t h e s e unpublished n o t e s t h e r e i s a n o t h e r i m p o r t a n t p i e c e
of e v i d e n c e showing t h a t S a u s s u r e r e g a r d e d language a s a s e m i o l o g i c a l
system. H e n r i Adrien N a v i l l e (1845-1930), a r e l a t i v e of S a u s s u r e ( c f .
CFS 21:105) and Dean of t h e F a c u l t y of A r t s and S o c i a l S c i e n c e s d u r i n g
S a u s s u r e ' s academic c a r e e r a t Geneva, p u b l i s h e d i n 1901 a monograph
e n t i t l e d Nouvelle c l a s s i f i c a t i o n d e s s c i e n c e s 2 1 i n which h e c l a s s i f i e s
s o c i o l o g y under what h e terms p s y c h o l o g i c a l s c i e n c e s ( c f . 90) , 2 2 and
makes a n e x p l i c i t r e f e r e n c e t o S a u s s u r e which m e r i t s q u o t a t i o n a t l e n g t h ,
a t t h i s p o i n t , b e c a u s e i t c o n s t i t u t e s t h e o n l y document on t h i s t o p i c
which appeared d u r i n g S a u s s u r e ' s l i f e t i m e . It n o t o n l y b e a r s w i t n e s s
t o S a u s s u r e ' s emphasis on t h e s e m i o l o g i c a l o v e r and above t h e s o c i o -
l o g i c a l a s p e c t of language and i t s s t u d y , b u t may a l s o s u g g e s t t h a t
S a u s s u r e adopted g e n e r a l s o c i o l o g i c a l n o t i o n s through h i s exchange of
i d e a s w i t h N a v i l l e who r e l a t e d S a u s s u r e ' s views i n t h e f o l l o w i n g manner:

M. Ferdinand d e S a u s s u r e i n s i s t e s u r l ' i m p o r t a n c e d ' u n e

s c i e n c e t r & g g n g r a l e , q u ' i l a p p e l l e s e m i o l o g i e e t dont
l ' o b j e t s e r a i t l e s l o i s d e l a crgation e t de l a trans-
f o r m a t i o n des s i g n e s e t de l e u r s s e n s . La s g m i o l o g i e e s t
une p a r t i e e s s e n t i e l l e d e l a s o c i o l o g i e . Come l e p l u s
i m p o r t a n t d e s systsmes d e s i g n e s c 'est l e l a n g a g e conven-
t i o n n e l des hornmes, l a s c i e n c e semiologique l a p l u s avancge
c ' e s t l a l i n g u i s t i q u e ou s c i e n c e s d e s l o i s d e l a v i e du
langage. La phonoZogie e t l a morphoZogie t r a i t e n t s u r t o u t
d e s mots, l a s&nantique du s e n s d e s mots. Mais il y a
c e r t a i n e m e n t a c t i o n r g c i p r o q u e des mots s u r , l e u r s e n s e t
du s e n s s u r l e s mots; v o u l o i r s g p a r e r c e s e t u d e s l ' u n e
de l ' a u t r e c e s e r a i t ma1 comprendre l e u r s o b j e t s . Les l i n -
g u i s t e s a c t u e l s o n t renoncg aux e x p l i c a t i o n s purement
b i o l o g i q u e s ( p h y s i o l o g i q u e s ) en phonologie [ r e a d : p h o n e t i c s /
h i s t o r i c a l phonology, c f . CLG, 55-61, e t c o n s i d s r e n t a v e c
r a i s o n l a l i n g u i s t i q u e t o u t e n t i s r e c o m e une s c i e n c e psycho-
logique.
La l i n g u i s t i q u e e s t , ou du moins t e n d 2 d e v e n i r d e p l u s
en p l u s , une s c i e n c e de l o i s ; e l l e s e d i s t i n g u e t o u j o u r s
p l u s n e t t e m e n t de l ' h i s t o i r e du l a n g a g e e t d e l a grammaire
[comparge?] 23 .
A comparison between t h i s q u o t a t i o n and c e r t a i n p a s s a g e s i n t h e Corns
24
( n o t a b l y p. 33) would show t h a t ' t h e c o n t e n t s a r e v e r y much a l i k e .
S a u s s u r e ' s second c o u r s e i n g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s (1908/09), t h e l o n g
i n t r o d u c t o r y p a r t of which was r e - e s t a b l i s h e d by Godel i n 1957 (CFS
15:6-103), o f f e r s some c l a r i f i c a t i o n of p r e v i o u s s t a t e m e n t s r e g a r d i n g
t h e r e l a t i o n between s o c i a l and s e m i o l o g i c a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s i n language
t o b e found i n t h e Corns. The f o l l o w i n g s t a t e m e n t seems t o a l l o w f o r a
rather straightforward interpretation: "Toutes l e s formes, t o u s l e s
r i t e s , t o u t e s l e s coutumes o n t un c a r a c t s r e s6miologique p a r l e u r c a r a c -
t & e social".(CFS 15:19). T h i s means t h a t a l l t h e s e conventiofis have
t h e i r o r i g i n i n s o c i a l g r o u p s , 2 5 i n human r e a l i z a t i o n s o f a r b i t r a r y
s i g n s of ( s o c i a l ) b e h a v i o u r ; ' c o l l e c t i v e ' and ' s o c i a l ' a r e synonymous
expressions (cf . CFS 15: 26), and i t i s i n t h i s r e s p e c t t h a t S a u s s u r e
could observe:

Nous voyons immgdiatement beaucoup mieux q u ' a v a n t que c ' e s t

uniquement l e f a i t s o c i a l q u i c r g e r a c e q u i e x i s t e dans un
systsme s6miologique. 02 e x i s t e - t - i l , dans un o r d r e q u e l -
conque, un s y s t s m e d e v a l e u r s s i c e n ' e s t de p a r l a c o l l e c -
t i v i t g ? Un i n d i v i d u t o u t s e u l e s t i n c a p a b l e d ' e n f i x e r
aucune. (CFS 15: 27) 26 .
Without i g n o r i n g t h e s o c i a l b a s i s of language a s w e l l a s o t h e r
systems of communicative b e h a v i o u r , S a u s s u r e developed a t h e o r y which
i n i t s e s s e n c e i s n o t b a s e d on s o c i o l o g i c a l n o t i o n s and which h e c a l l e d
semiology ( c f . CLG, 33-4, 100-1, 107, 112, 1 4 9 ) . S i n c e S a u s s u r e wished
t o make l i n g u i s t i c s a s c i e n c e i n i t s own r i g h t and w i t h a frame of r e f e r -
ence o f i t s own, s o c i o l o g i c a l e x p l a n a t i o n s of l i n g u i s t i c b e h a v i o u r were
of o n l y secondary o r even t e r t i a r y importance t o him. That i s why we >

do n o t f i n d a s i n g l e p a s s a g e where h e makes a c l e a r s t a t e m e n t c o n c e r n i n g
s o c i a l c o n s t r a i n t s e x e r c i s e d on t h e i n d i v i d u a l u s e r w i t h i n a g i v e n
l i n g u i s t i c community. 2 7 For t h e same r e a s o n , e x p r e s s i o n s l i k e ' s o c i a l '
v e r s u s ' i n d i v i d u a l ' a r e n e v e r t a k e n up a s t e c h n i c a l terms, b u t used i n
a ,comparatively u n s p e c i f i e d s e n s e ; t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between langue, t h e
l i n g u i s t i c code, and p a r o l e , t h e speech a c t i n which f e a t u r e s of langue
a r e a c t i v a t e d o r r e a l i z e d , i s of prime importance. Language a s a system
of s i g n s and i t s mechanism c o n s t i t u t e t h e c e n t r a l a s p e c t s of Saussurean
t h e o r y , and s o c i a l a s p e c t s of language a r e r e f e r r e d t o whenever n e c e s s a r y
(e.g. f o r t h e e x p l a n a t i o n of c e r t a i n f e a t u r e s of language change), b u t
h a r d l y amount t o much more t h a n commonplace o b s e r v a t i o n s and a p p e a r
t o b e used a s s u p e r f i c i a l c o a t i n g o f m a t t e r s which a r e i n t r i n s i c a l l y
l i n g u i s t i c i n nature.
I t i s n o t s u r p r i s i n g t h e r e f o r e t h a t W . Doroszewski who a t t e m p t e d
t o show S a u s s u r e ' s dependence on Durkheimian s o c i o l o g y h a s been q u i t e
unable t o o f f e r convincing t e x t u a l p a r a l l e l s between p a s s a g e s from t h e
Cours and t h o s e t a k e n from Durkheim's w r i t i n g s . 28 I n s t e a d of g i v i n g a t
l e a s t some s u g g e s t i v e q u o t a t i o n s from Durkheim's own work ( a s w e have
done a t t h e b e g i n n i n g of t h i s c h a p t e r ) , Doroszewski t r i e s t o i l l u s t r a t e
Durkheimian p r i n c i p l e s w i t h t h e h e l p of q u o t a t i o n s from Durkheim's a r t i c l e
~ e p r g s e n t a t i o n si n d i v i d u e l l e s e t r e p r g s e n t a t i o n s c o l l e c t i v e s "
11 o f 1898
which emphasizes j u s t t h o s e a s p e c t s ( i . e . r e p r e s e n t a t i o n and c o e r c i o n )
which do n o t p l a y any t a n g i b l e r6le i n S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r y , 29 and by r e -
f e r r i n g t o secondary s o u r c e s . 30 Doroszewski contends t h a t S a u s s u r e ' s
concept of langue corresponds t o Durkheim's f a i t social, s i n c e b o t h
appear t o b e a psycho-social phenomenon which e x i s t s i n t h e c o l l e c t i v e
c o n s c i e n c e of a g i v e n community and o u t s i d e t h e i n d i v i d u a l on whom i t
exercises a constraint. He does n o t s t a t e , of c o u r s e , t h a t , f o r S a u s s u r e ,
language i s above a l l a s i g n a l l i n g system of communication, something
which cannot b e p a r a l l e l e d by t h e Durkheimian concept of f a i t social
which h a s i t s s o l e e x i s t e n c e i n t h e minds of members of a s o c i a l group
inasmuch a s i t exercises constraint on t h e i n d i v i d u a l member of t h e
community. Furthermore, Doroszewski, convinced t h a t S a u s s u r e r e c e i v e d
h i s i n s i g h t s i n t o t h e n a t u r e of language from s o c i o l o g i c a l p r i n c i p l e s
I
and from o t h e r c o n s i d e r a t i o n s which a r e b a s i c a l l y f o r e i g n t o l i n g u i s t i c s ,
pushed h i s argument a s t e p f u r t h e r by s u g g e s t i n g t h a t S a u s s u r e ' s c o n c e p t
of parole had i t s s o u r c e i n t h e w r i t i n g s of an opponent of ~ u r k h e i m ' s
31
s o c i o l o g i c a l t h e o r y , G a b r i e l Tarde (1843-1904).
S u r p r i s i n g l y , Doroszewski p r o v i d e s t o a l l i n t e n t s and purposes
no documentation p e r t a i n i n g t o Tarde, and f a i l s t o name even one s i n g l e
i t e m of T a r d e ' s w r i t i n g s . 32 I n a d d i t i o n , we a r e a s t o n i s h e d t o n o t e t h a t
t h e Durkheimian d i s t i n c t i o n between s o c i a l and i n d i v i d u a l should have
been t a k e n up by S a u s s u r e i n t h e f i r s t p l a c e , i f h e had been s o deeply
i n f l u e n c e d by Durkheim's i d e a s , As H. M. Gauger (1970:5) h a s r e c e n t l y
reiterated. The Saussurean d i s t i n c t i o n between langue and parole ( a s
w i l l b e shown i n chap. 2.2.1) h a s s u r e l y been of p i v o t a l importance f o r
l i n g u i s t i c theory; i t has i t s source i n perennial questions p e r t a i n i n g
t o t h e " i n q u i r y i n t o t h e mechanism and c a u s e s of t h e s t i l l p u z z l i n g
phenomenon of language change" (Chomsky , 1966 :x) . Saussure's i n f l u e n t i a l
dichotomy, we contend, was n e c e s s i t a t e d by s p e c i f i c l i n g u i s t i c problems
and n o t by concepts a l i e n t o t h e n a t u r e of language and i t s e v o l u t i o n .
I n o r d e r t o h i n t a t a t l e a s t a p o s s i b l e s o u r c e of S a u s s u r e ' s d i s t i n c t i o n ,
we draw a t t e n t i o n t o t h e f a c t t h a t Hermann P a u l , whose famous Principles
of the H i s t o q of knguage appeared i n 1880 i n L e i p z i g f o r t h e f i r s t
time, d i s t i n g u i s h e d between "Sprachusus" (langue) and " i n d i v i d u e l l e
S p r e c h t Z t i g k e i t l ' (parole) as b o t h De Mauro (1968: 350) and, f o l l o w i n g
him, Mounin (1968:38) have p o i n t e d o u t .
~ o r o s z e w s k i ' s l a t e r d i s c l o s u r e (1958:544; n.3) t h a t h e had
r e c e i v e d s u p p o r t f o r h i s arguments from Louis C a i l l e , a former s t u d e n t
o f S a u s s u r e ' s i n Geneva,in 1931, who had t o l d him t h a t S a u s s u r e f o l l o w e d
w i t h profound i n t e r e s t t h e p h i l o s o p h i c a l d e b a t e between Durkheim and
~ a r d e l,e ~
d Godel
~ (SM, 282) t o s u g g e s t t h a t S a u s s u r e ' s concept of valeur
Zinguistique and t h e d e f i n i t i o n h e a t t r i b u t e d t o i t i n h i s f i n a l c o u r s e
on g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s ( c f . CLG, 159-60) s h o u l d b e compared w i t h t h e
forms of exchange t h a t Tarde had d e s c r i b e d i n h i s Psychologie 6conomique
of 1 9 0 2 . ~ I~n f a c t , when speaking of money and i t s v a l u e , T a r d e r e f e r s
t o e x c h a n g e a b i l i t y a s t h e p r i n c i p a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of t h e former, and i t
a p p e a r s t h a t S a u s s u r e may w e l l have d e r i v e d some of h i s i n s i g h t s i n t o
1
t h e n a t u r e o f t h e language s i g n from h i s economic t h e o r y . By comparing
t h e s e two passages o u r s u g g e s t i o n may become somewhat more v a l i d :

Tarde observed: ...

I' Quant 5
l 1 6 c h a n g e d'une esp&e de monnaie
c o n t r e une a u t r e espgce de monnaie,
d e d o l l a r s c o n t r e des r o u b l e s ou
c o n t r e des b i l l e t s de banque, d '
un 6cu de 5 f r a n c s c o n t r e des
p i s c e s d i v i s i o n n a i r e s , il a un
caractsre tout 2 f a i t 2 part, qui
n ' a d e commun que l e nom avec
Saussure, t r y i n g t o i l l u s t r a t e
how v a l u e and s i g n i f i c a t i o n c a n
b e confused w i t h each o t h e r ,
states:
"Pour rgpondre 2 c e t t e q u e s t i o n ,
c o n s t a t o n s d'abord que mgme en
dehors d e l a l a n g u e , t o u t e s l e s
v a l e u r s semblent r g g i e s p a r c e
l l & h a n g e d'une marchan- p r i n c i p e paradoxal. E l l e s s o n t
d i s e c o n t r e une a u t r e mar- I toujours constituees:
c h a n d i s e . L' &change d ' une lo p a r une chose dissemblable
monnaie c o n t r e une a u t r e s u s c e p t i b l e d V G t r eZchangZe con-
monnaie ( d 1 6 g a l e v a l e u r , t r e c e l l e dont l a v a l e u r e s t 2
b i e n entendu) e s t un pas- d g t erminer ;
s a g e du mGme au mGme, p u i s - 2" p a r d e s choses simiZaires q u '
que les deux choses s o n t on p e u t comparer a v e c c e l l e dont
i d e n t i q u e s en c e q u ' e l l e s l a v a l e u r e s t en c a u s e .
o n t d ' e s s e n t i e l , l e u r va- Ces deux f a c t e u r s s o n t n6ces-
l e u r . Mais 116change d'un s a i r e s pour l ' e x i s t e n c e d ' u n e va-
t a b l e a u c o n t r e un piano, l e u r . A i n s i pour d g t e r m i n e r c e
ou d ' u n boeuf c o n t r e une que v a u t une p i & e d e c i n q f r a n c s ,
armure, e s t l e remplace- il f a u t s a v o i r : lo qu'on p e u t 1'6-
ment d'un g e n r e d 1 u t i l i t 6 changer c o n t r e une q u a n t i t g d 6 t e r -
p a r une u t i l i t 6 t o u t a u t r e , minge d'une chose d i f f G r e n t e , p a r
absolument e t e s s e n t i e l l e - exemple du p a i n ; 2" qu'on p e u t l a
ment d i s s e m b l a b l e . comparer avec une v a l e u r s i m i l a i r e
du mzme systsme, p a r exemple une
(PsychoZogie 5conomique I , p i & e d'un f r a n c , ou avec une mon-
pp. 285-6). n a i e d'un a u t r e s y s t s m e (un d o l l a r ,
etc ).. .
(CLG, l 5 9 f . ; s CLG(E), 2 5 9 f . ) .
S a u s s u r e c o n t i n u e s t h a t a word c a n a l s o b e exchanged f o r something d i s -
similar (dissembZabZe), an i d e a , f o r i n s t a n c e , o r a n o t h e r word. The
comparison between t h e s e two t e x t s evokes a t f i r s t s i g h t s t r i k i n g s i m i -
l a r i t i e s , though upon f u r t h e r examination t h e y w i l l t u r n o u t t o b e q u i t e
s u p e r f i c i a l , p a r t i c u l a r l y s i n c e a number of t h e e x p r e s s i o n s used a r e
t h e same (e.g. e'change(r), v a l e u r , 5 ( c i n q ) f r a n c s , d o l l a r ( s ) , monnaie,
d i s s e m b l a b l e ) and s i n c e c e r t a i n examples a r e s i m i l a r ( e . g . t h e exchange
of f r a n c ( s ) f o r d o l l a r ( s ) ) . We must p o i n t o u t however, t h a t S a u s s u r e
s p e c i f i c a l l y used t h e term 'system' which one might e x p e c t t o f i n d i n
Tarde, b u t i n f a c t t h e word system does n o t occur even once i n t h e whole
c h a p t e r e n t i t l e d " ~ monnaie"
a (281-329), whereas S a u s s u r e n o t e d i n t h e
p a r a g r a p h p r e c e d i n g t h e above q u o t a t i o n t h a t language i s a system of i n t e r -
dependent terms i n which t h e v a l u e of each term r e s u l t s o n l y from t h e simul-
t a n e o u s p r e s e n c e of t h e o t h e r s (CLG, 1 5 9 ) . I n s h o r t , a comparison between
t h e s e two t e x t s does n o t a l l o w us t o deny t h a t S a u s s u r e d e r i v e d c e r t a i n
terms from s o c i a l economy; t h e l e x i c a l s i m i l a r i t y between t h e two q u o t a t i o n s
might even s u g g e s t t h a t S a u s s u r e a c t u a l l y took them from Tarde, b u t we a r e
q u i t e s a f e i n a r g u i n g t h a t Saussurean l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y does n o t owe major
i n s i g h t s t o economics. I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g t o n o t e how c e r t a i n myths p e r s i s t
as a r e s u l t of u n c r i t i c a l acceptance.
 FOOTNOTES - 1.2.1.1

S . La P a r t i e dogmatique de l a p h i l o s o p h i e soc a l e ( P a r i s : ~ o c i 6 t E
3
p o s i t i v i s t e d ' e n s e i g n e m e n t p o p u l a i r e s u p g r i e u r , 1893 = 1st e d . , 1839) .
I n t h i s volume Comte a p p e a r s t o h a v e d i s t i n g u i s h e d f o r t h e f i r s t t i m e
between t h e ' s t a t i c ' and 'dynamic' a s p e c t s of s o c i o l o g i c a l m a t t e r s ;
s . pp. 254-60 [ p a s s i m ] , and a l s o t h e p a p e r by Theodor Wiesengrund Adorno,
" ' S t a t i c ' and 'Dynamic ' i n S o c i o l o g i c a l C a t e g o r i e s ", ~ i o ~ z n e33: s 28-49
(1961). The q u e s t i o n of w h e t h e r FdS d e r i v e d h i s dichotomy o f s y n c h r o n y
v s . d i a c h r o n y from t h i s Comtean d i s t i n c t i o n w i l l b e d e a l t w i t h i n a
l a t e r c h a p t e r ( c f . 2.2.2.1).

S. t h e p r e f a c e t o h i s i n f l u e n t i a l book, Le S u i c i d e ( P a r i s : Alcan,
1 8 9 7 ) , i n which h e s t a t e d : "Depuis q u e l q u e temps l a s o c i o l o g i e est >
l a mode" (p. v ) .

It may w e l l b e a s k e d w h e t h e r t h i s i m p r e s s i o n h a s b e e n r e i n f o r c e d
by s u b s e q u e n t w r i t i n g s b y S a u s s u r e ' s Genevan d i s c i p l e s ; e . g . A. Sechehaye
n o t e d s i m i l a r c o n s t r a i n t s i n h i s p a p e r "La p e n s g e e t l a l a n g u e ou comment
c o n c e v o i r l e r a p p o r t o r g a n i q u e d e l ' i n d i v i d u e l e t du s o c i a l d a n s l a
langue", J P s 20, 57-81 ( l 9 3 3 ) , e s p . 63-4; r e p r . i n CFS 4 , 26-52 (1944).
S. a l s o Ch. B a l l y , "La c o n t r a i n t e s o c i a l e d a n s l e langage", RIS 35,
209-29; r e p r . i n h i s Le Langage e t la v i e , 3 r d ed. (Geneva: Dorz, 1 9 5 2 ) ,
115-32.

T h i s i s t h e c o n c l u d i n g s e n t e n c e o f h i s a r t i c l e 'Ze c a r a c t B r e
s o c i a l e du l a n g a g e e t l a d o c t r i n e d e F. d e ~ a u s s u r e " , JPs 1 8 ; 617-24;
r e p r . i n Vendryes, 1952:18-25.

T h i s a p p a r e n t l a c k of u n d e r s t a n d i n g of t h e main t e n e t s o u t l i n e d
i n t h e CLG (which i s a l s o c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f M e i l l e t ; c f . Mounin, 1968:
48-9) c a n b e s e e n from Vendryes' d e p r e c i a t i v e remark: " ... cet ouvrage
posthume, m a l g r g l ' a b o n d a n c e d e v u e s q u ' i l p r & i e n t e , n ' e s t p a s un e x p o s 6
m6thodique e t complet d e l i n g u i s t i q u e g6n&ale" (Vendryes, 1921: 4 , n . 1 ) .
S e e a l s o t h e remarks o f Mounin, 1968:162, n o t e and 176, n o t e , which
r e v e a l v e r y similar a t t i t u d e s e x p r e s s e d by M e i l l e t and A n t o i n e ~ r g ~ o i r e .

S e e A[2]CIL, 146-7 (1933 [ 1 9 3 1 ] ) ; d i s c u s s i o n , 147-8. F o r more

e x p l i c i t s t a t e m e n t s , s. D o r o s z e w s k i ' s p a p e r , "Quelques r e m a r q u e s s u r
les r a p p o r t s d e l a s o c i o l o g i e e t d e l a l i n g u i s t i q u e : [ E . ] Durkheim e t
F. d e S a u s s u r e " , J P s 30:82-91 (1933), now r e p r . i n P a r i e n t e , 1969:99-109.
S. a l s o h i s p a p e r " F i l o z o f i a i s o c j o l o g i a Durkheima" ( l 9 3 O ) , r e p r . i n
Doroszewski, 1962:89-101; e s p . 8 9 , n . 1 , and 100-1.
 7
S. M e i l l e t ' s p a p e r , "Comment l e s mots changent d e sens", (which
appeared i n t h e j o u r n a l founded ,by Durkheim) AnnSoe 8:l-38 (1905/06);
r e p r . i n LHLG I , 230-71, e s p . 230 where M e i l l e t makes e x p l i c i t r e f e r e n c e
t o Durkheim. S. a l s o h i s a d d r e s s of t h e same p e r i o d , " ~ ' g t a t a c t u e l
d e s g t u d e s de l i n g u i s t i q u e ggn&ale", LHLG I, 1-18; esp. 16-7, and t h e
summary of a p a p e r , "Niveau s o c i a l d e s mots", Anthropologie 36:132 (1927).
Cf. a l s o A l b e r t Dauzat's overview, " L ' o r i e n t a t i o n s o c i o l o g i q u e a c t u e l l e
dans l e s s c i e n c e s du langage", RIS 1.2:7-23 (1920), e s p . 18-9.

Cf. Vendryes, 1921:13 where h e c a l l s language Y e f a i t s o c i a l p a r

e x c e l l e n c e " ; Cohen, Pour une Sociologie du Zangage ( P a r i s : Michel, 1956);
Sommerfelt, " L i n g u i s t i c S t r u c t u r e s and t h e S t r u c t u r e of S o c i a l Groups,"
Dioge'ne 51, 186-92 (1965) ; Benvenis t e , "Nature du s i g n e l i n g u i s t i q u e " ,
AL 1, 23-9 (1939); r e p r . i n Venveniste, 1966:49-55. For f u r t h e r r e f e r e n c e ,
s . M. Cohen's paper " S t r u c t u r e s o c i a l e e t s t r u c t u r e l i n g u i s t i q u e , "
~ i o g z n e1 5 , 46-57 (1956). Thus i t i s a l s o i n t e r e s t i n g t o n o t e t h a t t h e
Russian l i n g u i s t M i x a i l ~ i k o l a e v i rP e t e r s o n who had been t o P a r i s i n
1925 p u b l i s h e d a paper "Jazyk kak s o c i a l n o e j a v l e n i e " [Language a s a s o c i a l
phenomenon] t h e f o l l o w i n g y e a r i n which h e drew a t t e n t i o n t o t h e a p p a r e n t
r e l a t i o n between t h e s o c i o l o g i c a l concepts of Durkheim and Tarde and
S a u s s u r e , a s N. A. S l j u s a r e v a r e p o r t s (CFS 20:34 [ 1 9 6 3 ] ) . S i m i l a r o b s e r -
v a t i o n s were made by D. N. Vvedenskij i n h i s p r e f a c e t o t h e Russ. t r a n s l .
of t h e CLG (Moscow: "Socekgiz", 1933), 5-30.

I n 1894 FdS noted t h a t h e had been convinced f o r s e v e r a l y e a r s

t h a t l i n g u i s t i c s i s a double s c i e n c e (SM, 33 and 44-5); s. a l s o Godel,
1968: 116.
10
We a r e aware, a p a r t from t h e concluding s e n t e n c e of t h e Cours
whose a u t h e n t i c i t y h a s been c o n t e s t e d ( c f . SM, 119 and 181; De Mauro,
1968:455-6), of what appeared t o have been S a u s s u r e ' s a f f i r m a t i o n t h a t
II
l a l i n g u i s t i q u e proprement d i t e [ e s t ] c e l l e dont l a l a n g u e e s t u n i q u e
o b j e t " (CLG, 38-9 i n c o n t r a s t t o CLG(E), 5 8 ) . There e x i s t s , however, no
document t o s u b s t a n t i a t e t h e c l a i m t h a t S a u s s u r e a c t u a l l y made such a
s t a t e m e n t a l t h o u g h t h e simple f a c t t h a t h e n e v e r provided a n o u t l i n e
f o r t h e s t u d y of parole may p o i n t t o s u c h a view.

l1 Kukenheim (1966: 99) m a i n t a i n s t h a t ~ u r k h e i m ' s i n f l u e n c e on M e i l l e t

and FdS i s undeniable; s i m i l a r s t a t e m e n t s c a n b e found i n Malmberg (1968:
7 0 ) , 1vi6 (1965: 1 2 3 ) , Robins (1967: 200), Gauger (1970: 5 ) , H e l b i g (1970: f

33) and o t h e r s w i t h o u t any t e x t u a l s u p p o r t .

We q u o t e from t h e 1 4 t h ed. ( P a r i s : PUF, 1960) which i s a r e p r i n t

of t h e 2nd ed. of 1901; t h e r e e x i s t s a n E n g l i s h t r a n s l . , p r e p a r e d by
Sarah A . Solovay and John-H. M u e l l e r , 8 t h ed., (The F r e e P r e s s of Glencoe,
1938), ed. w i t h an i n t r o d u c t i o n by George E. G. C a t l i n , Rules of the
.
Socio Zogical Method ( r e p r 1964) , l v i i i + 146 pp .
l3 I n t e r e s t i n g l y , Durkheim employs t h e f o l l o w i n g comparison:
I1
J e n e s u i s pas o b l i g 6 de p a r l e r f r a n ~ i s a v e cmes c o m p a t r i o t e s , n i d '
employer l e s monnaies l g g a l e s ; mais il e s t i m p o s s i b l e que j e f a s s e
autrement. S i j ' e s s a y a i s d'gchapper a c e t t e n 6 c e s s i t 6 , ma t e n t a t i v e
g c h o u e r a i t misgrablement" ( ~ Z g l e s , 5)....
l4 I d e a s of t h i s k i n d a p p e a r t o have been widely a c c e p t e d d u r i n g
t h e decades f o l l o w i n g Durkheim's f o r m u l a t i o n s . See, f o r i n s t a n c e , t h e
f o l l o w i n g a f f i r m a t i o n s by h i s one-time p u p i l Lucien Levy-Bruhl:
11Les r e p r g s e n t a t i o n s appelGes c o l l e c t i v e s , 2 n e l e s d e f i n i r qu'en g r o s
e t s a n s a p p r o f o n d i r , peuvent s e r e c o n n g i t r e aux s i g n e s s u i v a n t s : e l l e s
s o n t communes aux membres d'un groupe s o c i a l donng; e l l e s s ' y t r a n s -
m e t t e n t d e ggn&ation en g/en&ation; e l l e s s ' y imposent aux i n d i v i d u s
e t e l l e s g v e i l l e n t chez eux, s e l o n l e c a s , d e s s e n t i m e n t s d e r e s p e c t ,
de c r a i n t e , d ' a d o r a t i o n , e t c . , pour l e u r s o b j e t s . E l l e s n e dgpendent
p a s d e l ' i n d i v i d u pour e x i s t e r . Non q u ' e l l e s i m p l i q u e n t un s u j e t c o l -
l e c t i f d i s t i n c t d e s i n d i v i d u s q u i composent l e groupe s o c i a l , mais p a r c e
q u ' e l l e s s e p r & e n t e n t avec d e s c a r a c t s r e s dont on n e peut r e n d r e r a i s o n
p a r l a s e u l e c o n s i d 6 r a t i o n d e s i n d i v i d u s c o m e t e l s . C ' e s t a i n s i qu'
une l a n g u e , b i e n q u ' e l l e n ' e x i s t e , 2 proprement p a r l e r , que dans 1'
e s p r i t des i n d i v i d u s q u i l a p a r l e n t , n'en e s t pas moins une r g a l i t g
s o c i a l e i n d u b i t a b l e , fondge s u r un ensemble d e r e p r g s e n t a t i o n s c o l l e c t i v e s .
Car e l l e s'impose 2 c h u n d e c e s i n d i v i d u s , e l l e l u i p r g e x i s t e e t e l l e
l u i survit." (Les fonctions mentales dans Zes sociZtZs infZrieures
[ P a r i s : F. Alcan, 19101, p. 1 ) .

.
l5 Cf Durkheim, " ~ e ~ r & e n t a t i o nisn d i v i d u e l l e s e t r e p r g s e n t a t i o n s
c o l i e c t i v e s " , Revue de mZtaphysique e t de morale, v o l . 6 (May 1898) ;
r e p r . i n C e l e s t i n ~ o u ~ (l egd . ) , Emile Durkheim: Sociologie e t philosophie,
2nd ed. ( P a r i s : PUP, 1963), 1-48, here: p. 36.

FdS a p p e a r s i n t h i s r e s p e c t t o c o n t r a d i c t himself s i n c e h e c l e a r l y
o b s e r v e s t h a t l i n g u i s t i c change i s caused by parole, t h e speech ( a c t )
of t h e i n d i v i d u a l provided t h a t t h e speech community a c c e p t s t h i s inno-
v a t i o n changing a ' f a i t d e p a r o l e ' i n t o a ' f a i t d e l a n g u e ' (CLG, 1 3 8 ) .
Sechehaye r e j e c t e d t h i s n o t i o n of langue when h e s t a t e d ( i n h i s paper
r e f e r r e d t o i n n o t e 3 ) : "Nous n e croyons pas que l a c o n c e p t i o n s o c i o -
l o g i q u e d e l a langue nous o b l i g e 2 a d m e t t r e l ' e x i s t e n c e d e c e t t e l a n g u e
en s o i , dont l e s u j e t , en dehors d e s i n d i v i d u s p a r l a n t s , e s t i n i m a g i n a b l e "
(JPs 30:55 [ 1 9 3 3 ] ) .
l7 Apart from t h e CLG, s. a l s o SM, 257 r e s p . 274, and LTS, 17 r e s p .
44.

l8 We f o l l o w 6 . Mounin's c o u n t a c c o r d i n g t o which t h e r e a r e 138

o c c u r r e n c e s of t h e term 'systsme' i n a corpus of about 100,000 words:
s . h i s a r t i c l e , "La n o t i o n d e s y s t s m e chez Antoine M e i l l e t " , Linguistique
2.1: 17-29; h e r e : p. 24.

l9 Once a t l e a s t FdS makes a s t a t e m e n t which approaches what Durkheim

meant by "conscience c o l l e c t i v e " , when h e n o t e s : " l a langue e x i s t e dans
l a c o l l e c t i v i t 6 s o u s l a forme d ' e m p r e i n t e s deposges dans chaque cerveau"
(CLG, 3 8 ) , an e x p r e s s i o n which a c t u a l l y appears. when FdS d i s t i n g u i s h e s
between s y n c h r o n i c and d i a c h r o n i c l i n g u i s t i c s : "La Zinguistique synehronique
s ' o c c u p e r a d e s r a p p o r t s l o g i q u e s e t psychologiques r e l i a n t d e s termes
c o e x i s t a n t s e t formant s y s t ~ m e ,$ e l s q u ' i l s s o n t a p e r c u s p a r l a c o n s c i e n c e
c o l l e c t i v e 1 ' (CLG, 1 4 0 ) . Psychology, i t would seem, h a s t a k e n t h e p l a c e
of s o c i o l o g y .

20 ' S o c i a l ' and ' i n d i v i d u a l ' a r e n o t l i s t e d e i t h e r i n SM, 252-81

o r t h e LTS; Godel (1966:482) d e p l o r e d t h e f a c t t h a t t h e e d i t o r s had
been t o o c a r e f u l i n "weeding o u t " every d i s c r e p a n c y and a p p a r e n t uneveness,
t h u s g i v i n g t h e i m p r e s s i o n t o t h e r e a d e r t h a t t h e CLG i s a " m o n o l i t h i c
unity" .
21 T h i s book was a c t u a l l y a completely r e v i s e d ed. of h i s e a r l i e r
s t u d y , De la Classification des sciences: Etude logique (Geneva & B a s l e :
Georg, 1 8 8 8 ) , which appeared a few y e a r s p r i o r t o FdS's appointment
t o a p r o f e s s o r s h i p a t Geneva U n i v e r s i t y .

22 There N a v i l l e s t a t e s : " J ' a p p e l l e s c i e n c e s psychologiques l e s

s c i e n c e s q u i o n t pour o b j e t l e s l o i s d e l a v i e psychique." It appears
t o u s t h a t t h i s v i e w p o i n t i s v e r y c l o s e t o t h e S a u s s u r e a n c o n c e p t i o n of
language; c f . h i s s t a t e m e n t ; "Au fond, t o u t e s t psychologique dans l a
langue" (CLG, 21). N a v i l l e d e a l s w i t h s o c i o l o g y p r o p e r on pp. 103-7.

23 Nouvelle c l a s s i f i c a t i o n . . . (Paris: F. Alcan, 1 9 0 1 ) , 104;

t h i s p a s s a g e h a s a l s o been quoted i n a f o o t n o t e by D e Mauro, 1968:
318-9.

24 I n t h e subsequent c h a p t e r s o f h i s book, N a v i l l e d i s c u s s e s a t
l e n g t h t h e a s p e c t of s o c i a l c o n s t r a i n t (104-5) -
a n o t i o n which FdS
c o u l d h a v e found h e r e i f h e had had t h e i n t e n t i o n of i n c o r p o r a t i n g t h i s
c o n c e p t i n t o h i s t h e o r y , s i n c e h e knew t h i s book ( c f . LTS, 46 [ ' s i g n o l o g i e ' ] )
- b e f o r e r e f e r r i n g t o economics a s t h e o n l y , a p a r t from l i n g u i s t i c s , t r u l y
s c i e n t i f i c s o c i a l s c i e n c e (106-7).

25 Cf. FdS's s t a t e m e n t t h a t a s a r e s u l t of t h e neogrammarian d o c t r i n e

11
on n e v i t p l u s dans l a l a n g u e un organisme ... , mais un p r o d u i t d e
l ' e s p r i t c o l l e c t i f d e s groupes l i n g u i s t i q u e s " (CLG, 1 9 ) .

26 The e x p r e s s i o n " f a i t s o c i a l " o c c u r s s e v e r a l t i m e s i n t h e CLG

( s . 21, 30, 1 1 2 ) , b u t i t i s s u r e l y n o t a t e c h n i c a l term a s t h e co-
<
o c c u r r e n c e of " f a i t " w i t h o t h e r e x p r e s s i o n s would s u g g e s t , e . g . " f a i t s
humains" ( 3 3 ) , " f a i t e v o l u t i f " and " f a i t s t a t i q u e " (129), " f a i t h i s t o r i q u e l '
(112), " f a i t d e grammaire" ( 1 6 8 ) , " l e f a i t d e langue" and " l e f a i t d e
p a r o l e " (173), " f a i t d e langue1' (139), " f a i t d 1 6 v o l u t i o n " (138), " f a i t s
d i a c h r o n i q u e s " and " f a i t s s y n c h r o n i q u e s " ( 1 3 9 ) , t o q u o t e only some examples.

27 There a r e , i t i s t r u e , p a s s a g e s t o b e found i n t h e Cours which

may s u g g e s t t h e c o n t r a r y . I n t h e s e c t i o n d i s c u s s i n g t h e q u e s t i o n of
s y n c h r o n i c and d i a c h r o n i c laws i n l i n g u i s t i c s S a u s s u r e a p p e a r s t o h a v e
r a i s e d t h e q u e s t i o n of i n which way s o c i a l laws a p p l y t o l i n g u i s t i c
phenomena, c h a r a c t e r i z i n g every s o c i a l law a s governed by two fundamental
a s p e c t s : t h e y a r e imperative and general (CLG, 1 3 0 ) . However, we can
r e a d i n Godel ( w i t h r e g a r d t o t h i s p a r a g r a p h ) : "Aucune d e s deux s o u r c e s
cornbinges i c i [by B a l l y and Sechehaye] n e p a r l e d e l o i s s o c i a l e s " (SM,
116; c f . a l s o CLG(E), 2 0 3 ) , which means t h a t t h i s r e f e r e n c e t o s o c i o -
l o g i c a l n o t i o n s was added by t h e e d i t o r s of t h e CLG. On t h e f o l l o w i n g
p a g e (CLG, 131) a n even more s u g g e s t i v e p a s s a g e c a n b e found: "La l o i
synchronique e s t g&&ale, m a i s e l l e n t e s t pas imp&ative. Sans d o u t e
e l l e s ' i m p o s e a u x i n d i v i d u s p a r l a contrainte d e l ' u s a g e c o l l e c t i f "
( o u r i t a l i c s ) . C o n s u l t a t i o n o f t h e c r i t i c a l e d i t i o n , however, r e v e a l s
t h a t t h e s e c o n d h a l f of t h e s e n t e n c e h a d n o t b e e n added by t h e e d i t o r s
u n t i l t h e 3 r d ed. of t h e CLG i n 1 9 3 1 ( c f . CLG(E), 206), which may a l s o
e x p l a i n why Doroszewski who u s e d t h e 2nd ed. was q u i t e u n a b l e t o f i n d a
p a s s a g e s u i t a b l e t o p r o v e h i s c o n t e n t i o n . It i s c o n c e i v a b l e t h a t t h i s
emendation h a d b e e n c o n s i d e r e d f o l l o w i n g D o r o s z e w s k i ' s p a p e r r e a d i n
Geneva i n August 1931, t h e f u l l t e x t of which h e p r o b a b l y h a d s u b m i t t e d
s e v e r a l months p r i o r t o t h i s c o n f e r e n c e .
28 S. h i s a r t i c l e , "Quelques remarques s u r l e s r a p p o r t s d e l a s o c i o -
l o g i e et l a l i n g u i s t i q u e : Durkheim e t F. d e S a u s s u r e l ' , JPs 30:82-91
(1933) ; r e p r . i n P a r i e n t e , 1969 :99-109.

29 S . e s p . p. 86 o f ~ o r o s z e w s k i ' s p a p e r where h e a l s o q u o t e s from

t h e 8 t h e d . of t h e R2gZes de Za me'thode sociologique ( P a r i s : Alcan,
1927).

30 Roger Lacombe, La mmBthode sociologique de ~urkheim:Etude c r i t i q u e

( P a r i s : A l c a n , 1 9 2 6 ) , iii + 1 6 8 p p .

31 S. Doroszewski, op. c i t . , 90-1. He a f f i r m s : "Le r i g o r i s m e

d e l a n o t i o n d e l a ' l a n g u e ' est d u r k h e i m i e n , l e s c o n c e s s i o n s f a i t e s a u
f a c t e u r i n d i v i d u e l , 2 l a ' p a r o l e ' t i e n n e n t des idges d e Tarde. Ceci
para?t d i g n e e ' z t r e s o u l i g n & " ( 9 1 ) . Lepschy (1970:47-8) t a k e s a mid-way
p o s i t i o n , d e p l o r i n g a t t h e same t i m e t h a t no r e s e a r c h h a s b e e n done t o
e x p l o r e t h e s e c l a i m s when h e s t a t e s : " W i t h o u t n e c e s s a r i l y s u b s c r i b i n g
t o t h i s , i t may b e p o i n t e d o u t t h a t t h i s d i s t i n c t i o n [between langue
and parole] a p p e a r s t o b e of a g e n e r a l m e t h o d o l o g i c a l ( r a t h e r t h a n s p e c i -
f i c a l l y l i n g u i s t i c ) value, i n s o f a r a s it r e p r e s e n t s t h e process of a b s t r a c -
t i o n which i s n e c e s s a r y t o any s c i e n t i f i c p r o c e d u r e . "

32 Doroszewski ( b . 1899) h a s n o t a d d e d a n y t h i n g d u r i n g t h e p a s t
f o r t y y e a r s t o f i l l t h i s Zacunu.

33 S e e Doroszewski, Zoc. c i t . ( c f . n . 3 1 ) .

34 2 v o l s . ( P a r i s : F. A l c a n , 1902) ; Godel (SM, 282) r e f e r s t o v o l .

I, 285-6 a n d 289. As f o r Godel, h e a p p e a r s t o b e a t l e a s t p a r t l y con-
v i n c e d o f D o r o s z e w s k i ' s c o n t e n t i o n s : "I1 est c l a i r q u e l ' o p p o s i t i o n
Zangue:paroZe n ' e s t p a s simplement c e l l e du s i g n e e t du s o n [ ! I , d e l a
langue e t d e l a phonation [ ! I . Mais d a v a n t a g e c e l l e du f a i t s o c i a l e t
du f a i t i n d i v i d u e l l ' . ( S M , 1 4 6 ) . I t i s q u i t e u n t h i n k a b l e t h a t FdS s h o u l d
e v e r h a v e u t t e r e d a n y t h i n g s i m i l a r t o t h e f i r s t .two s t a t e m e n t s .
 1.2.1.2 Walras' T h e o r i e s of P o l i t i c a l Economy and t h e S a u s s u r e a n
I
Concept of Value

R e c e n t l y , J e a n P i a g e t (1968:17) and J . - C . P a r i e n t e (1969:20), who

both claim en passant t h a t S a u s s u r e was i n f l u e n c e d by Durkheim (and
T a r d e ) , have a s s e r t e d t h a t h e was d e f i n i t e l y i n s p i r e d by p o l i t i c a l economy
i n t h e development of h i s n o t i o n of a s y n c h r o n i c e q u i l i b r i u m of t h e
l a n g u a g e system ( P i a g e t ) and t h e dichotomy between synchrony and d i a -
chrony ( P a r i e n t e ) . However, n e i t h e r of t h e two h a s a t t e m p t e d t o g i v e
evidence f o r t h e i r a s s e r t i o n s .
I t i s t r u e t h a t S a u s s u r e d i d make r e f e r e n c e t o t h e d u a l i t y between
t h e p o l i t i c a l economy and economic h i s t o r y found i n r e c e n t l y p u b l i s h e d
books (CLG, 115) i n h i s c h a p t e r "La l i n g u i s t i q u e s t a t i q u e e t l a l i n g u i s -
t i q u e &olutive" (CLG, 1 1 4 f f ) . S i g n i f i c a n t l y t h e f i r s t s e c t i o n of t h i s
c h a p t e r i s e n t i t l e d " ~ u a l i t 6i n t e r n e d e t o u t e s l e s s c i e n c e s o p 6 r a n t s u r
les v a l e u r s " (114-7). However, S a u s s u r e does n o t expand on t h i s p a r a l l e l
( c f . a l s o SM, 230-5l), and i t a p p e a r s t h a t P a r i e n t e (1969:20) was t h e
f i r s t t o s u g g e s t a n i n f l u e n c e from t h e w r i t i n g s o f Leon Walras (1834-
1 9 1 0 ) , t h e head of t h e i n f l u e n t i a l Lausanne School of Economics, whose
EZ6ments dr6eonomie politique pure r a n through f o u r e d i t i o n s between
1
1874 and 1900.
Here t o o , a l t h o u g h we would f i n d t h a t t e c h n i c a l u s e h a s been made
o f "value",2 b u t n o t i n a s e n s e which would a l l o w us t o r e l a t e Walras'
c o n c e p t of ' v a l u e i n exchange' (vaZeur d ';change) w i t h t h e Saussurean
d e f i n i t i o n ofvaZew, S a u s s u r e does seem t o have d e r i v e d t h i s term from
p o l i t i c a l economy a s t h e f o l l o w i n g s t a t e m e n t s i n t h e Cows would s u g g e s t . I

A f t e r a f f i r m i n g t h a t l i n g u i s t i c s , l i k e p o l i t i c a l economy, i s c o n f r o n t e d
w i t h t h e n o t i o n of v a l u e , h e emphasizes t h a t b o t h have t o do w i t h a system
o f e q u i v a l e n c e s between t h i n g s of d i f f e r e n t o r d e r s , i l l u s t r a t i n g t h i s
i n t h e f o l l o w i n g manner: "dans l ' u n e [ i . e . p o l i t i c a l economy] un t r a v a i l
e t un s a l a i r e , dans l ' a u t r e [ i . e . l i n g u i s t i c s ] un s i g n i f i 6 e t un s i g n i -
f i a n t " (CLG, 115; CLG(E), 1 7 7 ) . I n both sciences, Saussure a s s e r t s ,
a s f o r a l l o t h e r s which o p e r a t e on ( a system o f ) v a l u e s , t h e d i s t i n c t i o n
between t h e a x i s of s i m u l t a n e i t y and t h e a x i s of s u c c e s s i o n imposes i t s e l f
on t h e t h e o r i s t . A s economic t h e o r y d i s t i n g u i s h e s between economic
h i s t o r y and p o l i t i c a l economy, s b l i n g u i s t i c s h a s t o d i s t i n g u i s h between
t h e d i s c i p l i n e which s t u d i e s t h e e v o l u t i o n of l i n g u i s t i c p a t t e r n s and
t h e o t h e r which a n a l y z e s language s t a g e s . It i s w i t h t h e l a t t e r a s p e c t
t h a t S a u s s u r e i s predominantly concerned s i n c e o n l y from a s y n c h r o n i c
p o i n t of view can language r i g h t l y b e i n t e r p r e t e d a s a "systsme d e p u r e s
v a l e u r s que r i e n n e dgtermine en dehors d e 1 1 6 t a t momentane de s e s termes"
(CLG, 1 1 6 ) .
Godel, though a f f i r m i n g t h a t S a u s s u r e made u s e of t h e term ' v a l e u r '
from 1908 onwards (SM, 235), b e l i e v e s t h a t i t i s n o t an a l t o g e t h e r e s t a b -
l i s h e d f a c t t h a t S a u s s u r e took t h i s term from t h e s o c i a l o r economic
sciences. We b e l i e v e t h a t i t would b e q u i t e u n r e a l i s t i c n o t t o assume
t h a t S a u s s u r e was w e l l aware of though n o t n e c e s s a r i l y i n f l u e n c e d by
f i n d i n g s of o t h e r f i e l d s of s c i e n t i f i c i n v e s t i g a t i o n and d e b a t e o u t s i d e
3
h i s own p a r t i c u l a r f i e l d .
A s f o r t h e term ' v a l u e ' , we a r e q u i t e s a f e i n assuming t h a t S a u s s u r e
borrowed i t from economics, b u t t h e s p e c i a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n h e attaches
t o t h i s e x p r e s s i o n i s d e f i n i t e l y h i s 0wn.l It was h e who s u g g e s t e d a
new s c i e n c e t o s t u d y systems of a r b i t r a r i l y f i x e d (and i n t h i s r e s p e c t
' s o c i a l ' ) v a l u e s ( s i g n s ) and f o r which h e coined t h e term semiozogie
( c f . CLG, 33; LTS, 4 7 ) . We could, once a g a i n , q u o t e a p a s s a g e from
Tarde which a p p e a r s t o s u p p o r t t h e c o n t e n t i o n of t h o s e who s t r e s s t h e
i n f l u e n c e of s o c i o l o g i c a l n o t i o n s on Saussurean l i n g u i s t i c s : "Entendue
dans s o n a c c e p t a t i o n l a p l u s s t r i c t e m e n t 6conomique, l ' i d g e d e v a l e u r
5
comporte un s e n s i n d i v i d u e l e t un s e n s s o c i a l , d i s t i n c t s l ' u n 2 l'autre".
For t h o s e who approach S a u s s u r e ' s Cows w i t h preconceived i d e a s a b o u t t h e
o r i g i n of t h e l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y developed t h e r e such a q u o t a t i o n might t

seem a p p e a l i n g , s i n c e i t c o n t a i n s t h e term of v a l u e and a l s o t h e o p p o s i t i o n

of s o c i a l v e r s u s i n d i v i d u a l . The c o n t i n u a t i o n of t h i s c i t a t i o n , however,
would show t h a t t h e r e a r e , b e s i d e s t e r m i n o l o g i c a l p a r a l l e l s , no s i m i l a r i t i e s
6
i n t h e i m p l i c a t i o n of t h e s e terms i n a g i v e n t h e o r e t i c a l framework.
We have u n t i l now n o t mentioned q u i t e a d i f f e r e n t p o s s i b l e s o u r c e
f o r t h e term valeur i n S a u s s u r e ' s Cows and h i s comparison of v a l u e
(which u s u a l l y p e r t a i n s t o words) w i t h money ( o f t e n t o i l l u s t r a t e i t s
arbitrary character). There a p p e a r s t o b e q u i t e a l o n g t r a d i t i o n of
comparing words w i t h c o i n s of ( s b c i a l ) exchange ( c f . a l s o ~ i c l g u ,1970:
26-7). This comparison was f o r i n s t a n c e made by t h e I t a l i a n p h i l o l o g i s t
Lionardo S a l v i a t i (1539-89) in his Avvertimenti deZZa lingua sopra i l
Decamerone of 1584, a s R. Engler h a s r e c e n t l y shown (1970:66). Similarly,
August Wilhelm von S c h l e g e l (1767-1845) employed t h i s metaphor i n h i s
famous Observations sur Za langue e t Za ZittZrature proven~ales of 1818
( c f . Kruszewski i n IZAS 3:161, n . 2 [1887], and Arens, 1969:190 f o r two
relevant quotations). We do n o t i n t e n d t o c a r r y t h i s s u g g e s t i o n f u r t h e r ,
a l t h o u g h t h e r e a r e r e a s o n s t o b e l i e v e t h a t S a u s s u r e , who was f a m i l i a r
w i t h European l i t e r a t u r e from t h e c l a s s i c a l p e r i o d u n t i l t h e 1 9 t h c e n t u r y
( c f . h i s anagrams), was aware of t h i s topos.
To conclude, we s h o u l d l i k e t o emphasize t h a t , w h i l e i t cannot b e
s e r i o u s l y denied t h a t S a u s s u r e was aware of t h e p r i n c i p l e s , developments
and f i n d i n g s of o t h e r ( s o c i a l ) s c i e n c e s , no proof can b e f u r n i s h e d , a s
h a s f r e q u e n t l y been p o i n t e d o u t by h i s t o r i a n s of l i n g u i s t i c s , t h a t S a u s s u r e
was a c t u a l l y exposed t o and dependent on t h e o r e t i c a l c o n c e p t s d e r i v e d
from a r e a s o t h e r t h a n l i n g u i s t i c s and e x t r a n e o u s t o t h e sub j e c t m a t t e r
of l i n g u i s t i c analysis. On t h e c o n t r a r y , a s w i l l b e demonstrated i n
t h e subsequent c h a p t e r s of o u r s t u d y , S a u s s u r e r e c e i v e d h i s i n s i g h t s
i n t o t h e n a t u r e of language almost e x c l u s i v e l y from contemporary w r i t i n g s
devoted t o l i n g u i s t i c problems which h i s genius was a b l e t o s y s t e m a t i z e
i n a manner h i t h e r t o o n l y p a r a l l e l e d by t h e l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r i e s of P a n i n i
two and a h a l f m i l l e n i a ago.
I n f i n e , w e can c l a i m t h a t t h e r e i s n o t a s i n g l e t e x t from e i t h e r
S a u s s u r e h i m s e l f o r from l e c t u r e n o t e s t a k e n by h i s s t u d e n t s which mentions
t h e names of Durkheim, Tarde, o r Walras who have been s u g g e s t e d by h i s -
t o r i a n s of l i n g u i s t i c s a s having i n f l u e n c e d Saussure.
 I

FOOTNOTES - 1.2.1.2

I
1st ed. (Lausanne: Rouge; P a r i s : Pichon; Basel: Georg, 1 8 7 4 ) ;
2nd p a r t 1877; 2nd ed. (Lausanne: Rouge; P a r i s : Pichon; L e i p z i g :
Dunker & Humblot, 1889); 3rd ed. ( i b i d . , 1896); 4 t h ed. ( i b i d . , 1 9 0 0 ) ;
t h e ' g d i t i o n d e f i n i t i v e 1 appeared i n 1926, a n E. t r a n s l . of which, w i t h
a n n o t a t i o n s and c o l l a t i o n s from t h e p r e v i o u s e d i t i o n s , was p r e p a r e d by
William J a f f e , and appeared under t h e t i t l e Elements of Pure Economics
or the Theory of SociaZ Wealth (Homewood, I l l . : Richard & I r w i n , 1 9 5 4 ) ,
620 pp. S. a l s o t h e f o l l o w i n g two s t u d i e s by Walras: Z'hZorie de Za
monnaie (Lausanne: Corbaz, l 8 8 6 ) , and Etudes d '6cononrie poZitique a p p l i -
quge (Lausanne: Rouge; P a r i s : Pichon, 1898).
We q u o t e from t h e E. t r a n s l . l i s t e d i n f n . 1: "VaZue i n exchange
i s a p r o p e r t y , which c e r t a i n t h i n g s p o s s e s s , of n o t b e i n g g i v e n o r t a k e n
f r e e l y , b u t of b e i n g bought and s o l d , t h a t i s , of b e i n g r e c e i v e d and
conveyed i n r e t u r n f o r o t h e r t h i n g s i n d e f i n i t e q u a n t i t a t i v e p r o p o r t i o n s "
(83; s. a l s o pp. 498, n.1; 499, n.6 [ f o r a d d i t i o n a l e x p l a n a t i o n by t h e
e d i t o r ] , and 178, n . 1 [added by Walras i n 19001).

I n t h i s c o n t e x t i t i s i n t e r e s t i n g t o n o t e t h a t E r n e s t Muret (1861-
1940), a former p u p i l and l a t e r c o l l e a g u e of S a u s s u r e ' s , r e p o r t s i n h i s
o b i t u a r y o f t h e l a t t e r t h a t S a u s s u r e , w h i l e d e l i v e r i n g h i s l e c t u r e s on
g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s ( 1 9 0 7 - l l ) , f u l f i l l e d t h e f u n c t i o n s of t h e l i b r a r i a n
of t h e F a c u l t y of L e t t e r s and S o c i a l S c i e n c e s a t Geneva U n i v e r s i t y "avec
l a c o n s c i e n c e s c r u p u l e u s e q u ' i l m e t t a i t 2 t o u t e chose" ( F a (2857-1913),
46) a h i n t which, we b e l i e v e , would u n d e r s c o r e two a s s e r t i o n s : f i r s t ,
S a u s s u r e had a l r e a d y been exposed, through h i s o b l i g a t i o n s a s a l i b r a r i a n ,
t o w r i t i n g s d e a l i n g w i t h t h e s o c i a l s c i e n c e s ; and second, S a u s s u r e ,
s c r u p u l o u s a s h e was, would have acknowledged h i s d e b t t o anybody from
whom h e had d e r i v e d p a r t i c u l a r i n s i g h t s i n t o h i s own l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y
( a s h e d i d i n t h e c a s e of Whitney and a number of o t h e r s c h o l a r s ) , a n
a s p e c t of FdS's c h a r a c t e r which h a s r e c e n t l y been s t r e s s e d by Godel
(1968: 116-7) .
4
I n t h i s connection i t i s i n t e r e s t i n g t o n o t e t h a t A. N a v i l l e
s t a t e d i n h i s NouveZZe c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f 1901 ( a l r e a d y r e f e r r e d t o e a r l i e r
i n chap. 1 . 2 . 2 : "Des i n n o b r a b l e s s c i e n c e s s o c i o l o g i q u e s d e s i r a b l e s ,
une s e u l e , o u t r e l a l i n g u i s t i q u e , semble s ' a p p r o c h e r d'une c o n s t i t u t i o n
vraiment s c i e n t i f i q u e - c ' e s t l'&onomique" (106).

This q u o t a t i o n i s t a k e n from t h e c h a p t e r e n t i t l e d "Les p r i x

( t h 6 o r i e de l a v a l e u r ) " i n T a r d e ' s Psychologie 5conomique ( P a r i s : F.
Alcan, 1902) 11, 11-56; h e r e p. 1 2 .
 I n f a c t , t h e quotation continues a s follows: " ... e t , dans
chacun de c e s s e n s , il f a u t d i s t i i n g u e r deux a s p e c t s oppose's e t j u x t a -
pose's d e c e t t e ide'e, s u i v a n t q u ' e l l e suppose une l u t t e ou une a l l i a n c e
de de'sirs e t d e jugements" ( i b i d . ). A c e r t a i n number of o t h e r w r i t i n g s
by Tarde could i n v i t e f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h i n t o p o s s i b l e p a r a l l e l s between
.
s o c i a l t h e o r y and Saussurean l i n g u i s t i c terminology: s , f o r i n s t a n c e ,
h i s book Les L o i s s o c i a l e s , 3 r d ed. ( P a r i s : Alcan, 1902). P a s s a g e s from
T a r d e ' s t r e a t i s e , L f O p p p o s i t i o n u n i v e r s e Z l e : E s s a i d'une t h e b r i e d e s
c o n t r a i r e s ( i b i d . , l 8 9 7 ) , e s p . 304-12 (where h e c i t e s from t h e works of
Raoul d e l a G r a s s e r i e [1839-19141, Archibald Henry Sayce [1846-19331,
and o t h e r s ) o r from h i s Lois de 2 ' i m i t a t i o n , 2nd ed. ( i b i d . , 1895), e s p .
277-87 ( i n which he s t r e s s e s t h e importance o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l o r t h e f a m i l y
i n b r i n g i n g a b o u t l i n g u i s t i c changes), may s u g g e s t t h e r e v e r s e p i c t u r e ,
i . e . t h a t Tarde drew much i n f o r m a t i o n from l i n g u i s t i c s .
1.3 The Question of Linguistic Jnfluences on Saussure

.
Es i s t . . schon schuer gmorden, i m
einzelnen FaZZe i m e r die SteZZe anzuge-
ben, von wo neue Anregungen ausgingen
oder neue Einsichten zuerst v e r b r e i t e t
worden sind.
G u s t a v GrGber i n 1904
( q u o t e d from Kukenheim, 1966: 247)

La meiZZeure mani2re de proczder s e r a i t

de prendre Zes expositions dont se servent
Zes bons Zinguistes quand i Z s parlent de
phZnom2nes statiques, e t de v o i r Zes er-
r e u r s e t Zes i l l u s i o n s quleZles contiennent.
Saussure i n an interview with Albert
R i e d l i n g e r i n J a n u a r y 1909 ( c f . SM, 29)

Jusqu'a przsent on a consid&G Saussure

surtout d'une facon ahistorique, c'est-2-
dire, dans ses rapports avec Za Zinguis-
tique uztzrieure, en tant que point de
d6part d 'une nouveZ Ze Zinguis tique, e t
non pas en t a n t que point final d'une
tradition, c 'est-2-dire, dans ses rapports
avec Za Zinguis tique antzrieure.
Eugenio C o s e r i u (19 67b :100)

The p r e s e n t s e c t i o n of t h i s s t u d y , d e v o t e d t o t h e d i s c u s s i o n o f
l i n g u i s t i c i n f l u e n c e s on S a u s s u r e , i s i n t e n d e d t o s u b s t a n t i a t e two o f o u r
p r i n c i p a l c l a i m s r e g a r d i n g t h e g e n e s i s of S a u s s u r e ' s l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y .
F i r s t , we b e l i e v e t h a t i t i s much more v a l i d t o t r a c e l i n g u i s t i c i n f l u e n c e s /

on Saussure than t o i n v e s t i g a t e e x t r a - l i n g u i s t i c sources. The l a t t e r

a p p e a r t o h a v e made t h e i r i m p a c t on S a u s s u r e r a t h e r t h r o u g h l i n g u i s t i c
s t u d i e s which h a d a b s o r b e d i d e a s from o u t s i d e l i n g u i s t i c s p r o p e r .
We may r e c a l l S c h l e i c h e r ' s a d a p t i o n o f H e g e l i a n p h i l o s o p h y a n d D a r w i n i a n
p r i n c i p l e s of e v o l u t i o n i n t h e f o r m a t i o n of h i s l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y o r
S t e i n t h a l ' s psychologism which had i t s main s o u r c e i n H e r b a r t . Secondly,
we m a i n t a i n t h a t t h e immediate s o u r c e s of S a u s s u r e ' s i n s p i r a t i o n a r e
t o b e found i n t h e l i n g u i s t i c work of h i s p r e d e c e s s o r s and h i s contem-
p o r a r i e s i n t h e second h a l f of t h e 1 9 t h c e n t u r y r a t h e r t h a n i n t h e t h e o r i e s
p u t forward i n p r e v i o u s c e n t u r i e s a s Jakobson (1965), Robins (1967),
Coseriu ( l 9 6 7 a ) , and o t h e r s h a v e sugggested. T h i s does n o t mean t h a t
those influences can b e denied. There a r e i n f a c t i n d i c a t i o n s t h a t
c e r t a i n a s p e c t s of S a u s s u r e ' s l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y owe some i n s i g h t s t o t h e
Greeks, perhaps n o t s o much t o t h e m o d i s t a e (who were almost completely
i g n o r e d d u r i n g t h e 1 9 t h c e n t u r y ) , b u t p o s s i b l y t o t h e i d e a s of t h e 1 7 t h
and 1 8 t h c e n t u r y p h i l o s o p h e r s of language and t h e t h e o r i e s of t h e I n d i a n
grammarians, n o t a b l y P h i n i , which were r e d i s c o v e r e d towards t h e end of
t h e 18th century.
The c h a p t e r s of t h i s s e c t i o n a r e a r r a n g e d i n mutatis mutandis,
a c h r o n o l o g i c a l o r d e r which s u g g e s t s , a t t h e same time, a c e r t a i n depen-
dence by t h e neogramrnarians on t h e p r i n c i p l e s of language s t u d y p u t forward
by Whitney, t h e i n f l u e n c e on t h e l i n g u i s t s working a t Kazan, of t h e
Junggrmatiker, n o t a b l y P a u l and S i e v e r s b u t a l s o Delbriick, Leskien,
Brugmann and O s t h o f f , K a r l Verner and S a u s s u r e (who, e x c e p t f o r Saussure,
a r e o n l y mentioned i n p a s s i n g i n t h e p r e s e n t i n v e s t i g a t i o n ) , and f i n a l l y
t h e f a c t t h a t p r i n c i p l e s advocated by Gabelentz and Finck, f o r i n s t a n c e ,
had been l a r g e l y a n t i c i p a t e d i n t h e w r i t i n g s of Whitney, t h e neogrammarians,
Baudouin d e Courtenay and Kruszewski, and, of c o u r s e , by l i n g u i s t s f o l l o w i n g
t h e Humboldtian t r a d i t i o n .
1.3.1 Whitney and t h e C o n s i d e r a t i o n of General L i n g u i s t i c Problems

.
" . . des d i f f z r e n t e s tentatives qui pour l a p r e m i s r e f o i s
tendaient entre l e s annges 1860 e t 1870 2 dGgager < de Za
s o m e des > r2suZtats accwrml2s < par > Za g r m a i r e comparze
[ ] quelque chose de gZn5raZ < sur Ze langage > , toutes
Ztaient avortzes < ou sans valeur d'ensemble > , sauf c e l l e
de Whitney, qui du premier coup z t a i t dans l a direction juste,
e t n ' a besoin aujourd'hui que d 'Ztre patiement suiwi. IZ
e s t en date Ze premier qui < a i t su ne > pas t i r e r des con-
cZusions absurdes sur Ze Langage de Z 'oeuvre de Za gram [maireI ."
F. de Saussure i n 1894
(from a h i t h e r t o unpublished m s . [ N 1 0 , p. 4 ( c f . SM, 3 7 ) ] )

"The f i r s t American book on general l i n g u i s t i c s , W i ZZiam

Dwight Whitney ' s Language and the Study of Language ( 1867),
may fairly be regarded as marking the dawn of a n m era.
I t probably succeeded b e t t e r than any e a r l i e r European book
on the subject i n basing i t s e l f on real l i n g u i s t i c data rather
than abstract speculations."
F r a n k l i n Edgerton i n 19 43 (PAPA 87 :25)

It i s c u r i o u s t o o b s e r v e t h a t many h i s t o r i a n s of l i n g u i s t i c s h a v e
overlooked something which appears t o b e most obvious. There a r e t h r e e
e x p l i c i t r e f e r e n c e s i n t h e Cours t o t h e g r e a t American 1 9 t h c e n t u r y
l i n g u i s t Whitney (CLG, 18, 26, 1 1 0 ) , b u t , by c o n t r a s t , n o t a s i n g l e
r e f e r e n c e t o Durkheim. N e v e r t h e l e s s , t h e l i s t of t h o s e who c l a i m t h a t
Durkheim i n f l u e n c e d S a u s s u r e i s f a r l o n g e r t h a n t h e number of s u g g e s t i o n s
t h a t Whitney might have had some impact on S a u s s u r e ' s l i n g u i s t i c t h o u g h t .
S i n c e Doroszewski's f i r s t s t a t e m e n t of 1931 i t h a s almost become a n
opinio communis n o t needing t o b e checked o r proved t h a t S a u s s u r e was
deeply i n f l u e n c e d by Durkheimian sociology ( c f . Kacnel'son, 1941:67;
Graur/Wald, 1 9 6 5 : l l l ; Kukenheim, 1966:99; Robins, 1967:200; Dinneen,
1967: 192-5; Malmberg, 1968: 70, and o t h e r s )
1
.
Some l i n g u i s t s m a i n t a i n
t h a t S a u s s u r e was i n f l u e n c e d by Durkheim a s w e l l a s by Whitney ( e . g .
~ v i c ? , 1965: 122-3; Mountn, 1968: 21-4) ; Mounin made a number of a l l u s i o n s
p e r t a i n i n g t o Whitney's importance on Saussure i n an e a r l i e r s t u d y (1967:
6, 15, 216, 220-I), b u t d i d not attempt t o g i v e evidence f o r h i s c o n t e n t i o n .
 75
When p r e p a r i n g h i s monograph of 1968 h e c o n s u l t e d De Mauro's 1967 s t u d y
which f o r t h e f i r s t time attempt'ed t o p r e s e n t a l l e x t e r n a l and t e x t u a l
f a c t s a v a i l a b l e w i t h r e g a r d t o S a u s s u r e ' s a c q u a i n t a n c e w i t h Whitney's
work ( s . De Mauro, 1968: 299-301, 323-4, 327-9, 352-3) . But a l t h o u g h h e
g e n e r a l l y b a s e d h i s s t u d y on De Mauro's f i n d i n g s , Mounin d i d n o t make
any s e r i o u s a t t e m p t t o supply more c o n c r e t e r e f e r e n c e s t o Whitney, whom
h e mentioned q u i t e f r e q u e n t l y i n h i s work on S a u s s u r e (1968:17, 22,
24, 52, 1 1 4 ) , a l s o reproducing t h e p a s s a g e from t h e Cows (110-1) which
shows Whitney's impact on S a u s s u r e ' s r e a s o n i n g (1968:113) w i t h o u t any
comment, p e r h a p s simply b e c a u s e De Mauro does n o t g i v e any q u o t a t i o n from
Whitney's w r i t i n g s e i t h e r .
T h i s s t a t e of a f f a i r s i s a l l t h e more s u r p r i s i n g i f we n o t e t h a t
Godel's d i s s e r t a t i o n appeared i n 1957, i n o t h e r words many y e a r s b e f o r e
t h e ' h i s t o r i e s ' o f l i n g u i s t i c s by Kukenheim, Malmberg, Mounin and o t h e r s
and s i m i l a r monographs were w r i t t e n , a s t u d y i n which Durkheim i s o n l y
mentioned i n a n addendum (SM, 282). Mounin f o r example, who does n o t
seem t o h a v e e v e r s e r i o u s l y c o n s u l t e d t h i s work, t a k e s j u s t t h i s r e f e r e n c e
t o s t a t e t h a t Godel was r i g h t i n s t r e s s i n g p a r t i c u l a r l y t h e r G l e which
S a u s s u r e a t t r i b u t e d t o t h e n o t i o n of v a l u e i n s e m a n t i c s (!) h a v i n g i n
mind t h o s e forms of exchange which Tarde had d e s c r i b e d i n h i s PsychoZogie
6eonomique o f 1902 (Mounin, 1968:26). Had Mounin looked i n s i d e t h e
S o u r c e s Manuseritas, h e would h a v e found t h a t on t h o s e o c c a s i o n s when
Godel d e a l s w i t h t h e s o c i a l a s p e c t of l a n g u a g e (SM, 142-59), Whitney i s
mentioned q u i t e f r e q u e n t l y ( s . SM, 143, 144, 147, 148, 152, 1 5 8 ) , b u t
passages t r e a t i n g t h e problem of v a l u e (SM 167, 172, 235-45 [ p a s s i m ] )
do n o t name T a r d e o r any o t h e r s o c i o l o g i s t .
I t i s t h e r e f o r e g r a t i f y i n g t o s e e t h a t , more r e c e n t l y , l i n g u i s t s
have t e n d e d t o b e more c a u t i o u s when r e l a t i n g t h e t r a d i t i o n a l c l a i m t h a t
S a u s s u r e is s a i d t o have developed t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between langue and
p a r o l e i n h i s a t t e m p t t o r e c o n c i l e t h e c o n t r a s t i n g views of Durkheim
and Tarde ( c f . De Mauro, 1969:116; Lepschy, 1970:47-8). But i t i s even
more i m p o r t a n t t o f i n d i n Arens t h e c l e a r s t a t e m e n t t h a t S a u s s u r e was
n o t dependent on Durkheim though h e acknowledges s i m i l a r i t i e s between
t h e i r t h e o r i e s (1969:467). This a f f i r m a t i o n appears t o b e i n d i r e c t l y
s u p p o r t e d by R. ~ n g l e r ' s r e c e n t a r t i c l e on S a u s s u r e i n which h e a n a l y z e s
I

n o t o n l y v a r i o u s a s p e c t s of S a u s s u r e v s s e m i o l o g i c a l t h e o r y b u t a l s o
p a s s a g e s i n t h e t h r e e monographs by A. N a v i l l e devoted t o a c l a s s i f i c a t i o n
of t h e s c i e n c e s ( a l r e a d y r e f e r r e d t o i n t h e p r e v i o u s c h a p t e r ; s . 1 . 2 . 2 ) .
Engler p o i n t s o u t t h a t t h e t h i r d v e r s i o n of N a v i l l e ' s C Z a s s i f i c a t i o n d e s
s c i e n c e s 2 of 1920 c o n t a i n e d f o r t h e f i r s t t i m e a n e x p l i c i t r e f e r e n c e
t o Durkheim ( E n g l e r , 1970:63). I n f a c t , t h e p a s s a g e on semiology, which
was c o n t a i n e d i n t h e Nouvelle c l a s s i f i c a t i o n d e s s c i e n c e s (1901:104),
had been e l i m i n a t e d and a p p a r e n t l y r e p l a c e d by a r e f e r e n c e t o Durkheim
whose c o n c e p t i o n of language however N a v i l l e r e j e c t s (1920:139). Barilli's
r e c e n t r e a f f i r m a t i o n of t h e t r a d i t i o n a l view t h a t S a u s s u r e ' s langue i s
i n p e r f e c t correspondence w i t h Durkheim (1968:238), i t would seem, makes
i t n e c e s s a r y t o show i n d e t a i l i n which way S a u s s u r e was i n s p i r e d by
Whitney's i d e a s by p r o v i d i n g t e x t u a l e v i d e n c e of t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p
which r e g r e t t a b l y h a s n o t been a t t e m p t e d i n any work h i t h e r t o p u b l i s h e d .
Godel's 1957 monograph, i t i s t r u e , makes f r e q u e n t r e f e r e n c e t o Whitney's
w r i t i n g s ( s . n o t e 20) w i t h o u t , however, q u o t i n g t h e r e l e v a n t p a s s a g e s ;
Godel's 1966 p a p e r on S a u s s u r e a g a i n s t r e s s e s Whitney's importance i n
t h e development of Saussurean l i n g u i s t i c s , b u t f a i l s t o p r o v i d e convincing
s u p p o r t of h i s c o n t e n t i o n ( s . Godel, 1966:479-80).
T h i s r e g r e t t a b l e s t a t e of a f f a i r s i s a l l t h e more s u r p r i s i n g when
w e n o t e t h a t Sechehaye drew a t t e n t i o n t o S a u s s u r e ' s e a r l y a c q u a i n t a n c e
w i t h Whitney's work a s e a r l y a s i n 1917 i n a n e x t e n s i v e a n a l y s i s of t h e
COUPS .3 F o r t y y e a r s l a t e r Godel, having Sechehaye's a s s e r t i o n s i n mind,
contends: " . . . il n ' e s t pas s h que l e s l i v r e s de Whitney a i e n t f a i t
grand b r u i t 2 L e i p z i g : S a u s s u r e a pu n e l e s c o n n a i t r e qu'un peu p l u s
t a r d " (SM, 3 3 ) . Godel adds t h a t Sechehaye's u s e of "sans doute" i n
h i s s t a t e m e n t c o n s t i t u t e s a c o n j e c t u r e and an assumption r a t h e r t h a n
an a f f i r m a t i o n of something h e had l e a r n e d from S a u s s u r e h i m s e l f (SM, 33,
n . 3 5 ) , a s h a s r e c e n t l y been assumed by De Mauro (1968: 299) . However,
i n view of t h e f a c t t h a t Godel h a s r e i t e r a t e d h i s c o n t e n t i o n (1966:479),
we s h a l l g i v e what we b e l i e v e t o b e e x t e r n a l e v i d e n c e f o r o u r a s s e r t i o n
t h a t S a u s s u r e had a l r e a d y come t o know Whitney's p u b l i c a t i o n s a t L e i p z i g ,
where h e had moved i n 1876. Whitney's f i r s t book appeared i n 1867;
h i s Language a n d t h e Study of Language r a n through f i v e e d i t i o n s u n t i l
1 8 8 5 , ~was reviewed by Wilhelm blemm i n 1869 (KZ 18:119-25), and German
and E n g l i s h a d a p t i o n s were p u b l i s h e d i n 1874 followed by a Dutch t r a n s -
l a t i o n of two volumes i n 1877-81. I n 1874 J u l i u s J o l l y (1849-1932), who
p r e p a r e d t h e German a d a p t i o n , w r o t e an a r t i c l e devoted t o Whitney a s a
S a n s k r i t i s t and g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t (GGA, 205-18), and i n 1875 Wilhelm
S c h e r e r (1841-86), who was f a m i l i a r w i t h Whitney 's s t u d y of 1867 when h e
w r o t e h i s i n f l u e n t i a l Z u r G e s c h i c h t e d e r d e u t s c h e n Sprache ( B e r l i n 1868) ,
5
p u b l i s h e d a review of Die S p r a c b i s s e n s c h a f t i n t h e P r e u s s i s c h e J a h r b i k h e r
(35: 106-11) . But Whitney 's second book on g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c problems
6
had a l r e a d y appeared i n 1875, i n New York and London under t h e t i t l e o f
7
The L i f e a n d Growth of Language and i n P a r i s i n a French v e r s i o n , La Vie
du Zangage.8 I n t h e same y e a r Whitney p u b l i s h e d a l e n g t h y a r t i c l e ,
a p p a r e n t l y t h e o n l y one h e was e v e r t o w r i t e i n German, " S t r e i t f r a g e n
d e r h e u t i g e n Sprachphilosophie", i n w h i c h , a f t e r h a v i n g o u t l i n e d h i s own
views, h e s e v e r e l y c r i t i c i z e d t h e a t t i t u d e . of t h e l i n g u i s t i c p u b l i c i n
a c c e p t i n g w i t h o u t q u e s t i o n t h e e r r o n e o u s t h e o r i e s about t h e n a t u r e o f
language p u t forward by t h e " a u t h o r i t i e s " , .
i e. Schleicher, Steinthal,
Renan, and Max ~ i i l l e r . ' I n 1876, when S a u s s u r e a r r i v e d a t L e i p z i g Univer-
s i t y , h i s t e a c h e r August Leskien, whose c o u r s e s on S l a v o n i c and L i t h u a n i a n
h e a t t e n d e d r e g u l a r l y ( s . CFS 17:21), had j u s t p r e p a r e d t h e German t r a n s -
l a t i o n of Whitney's L i f e a n d Growth of Lunguage,l0 a book which was soon
t r a n s l a t e d i n t o I t a l i a n (1876), Dutch (1879), Swedish (1880), and a p p a r e n t l y
also ~ussian." The " B i b l i o g r a p h i s c h e Notizen f i i r d i e J a h r e , 1875-1877",
p u b l i s h e d i n t h e same volume, i n which Verner's famous paper on e x c e p t i o n s
t o t h e F i r s t Germanic Consonant S h i f t appeared (KZ 23:602-22), carried
s o many i t e m s by Whitney t h a t t h e y c o u l d n o t have escaped S a u s s u r e ' s
n o t i c e , 1 2 and i f we add t h a t h i s f r i e n d Brugmann ( a s w e l l a s a number
of o t h e r young s c h o l a r s a t L e i p z i g ) acknowledged l a t e r h i s i n d e b t e d n e s s
13
t o Whitney and t h e s u p p o r t h e drew from h i s w r i t i n g s i n t h e s e v e n t i e s ,
we b e l i e v e t h a t i t can b e s u f f i c i e n t l y e s t a b l i s h e d t h a t S a u s s u r e had
r e a d Whitney q u i t e e a r l y i n h i s academic c a r e e r .
I n c i d e n t a l l y , when S a u s s u r e s t u d i e d S a n s k r i t and I n d i a n p h i l o l o g y
a t t h e U n i v e r s i t y of B e r l i n (1878179) w i t h Hermann Oldenberg (1854-1920)
and H e i n r i c h Zimmer (1851-1910), t h e l a t t e r of t h e two s c h o l a r s was
engaged i n p r e p a r i n g t h e German ' t r a n s l a t i o n of Whitney 's Sanskrit Grammar
b o t h of which appeared i n L e i p z i g i n 1879. l4 S i n c e h i s Mgrnoire had
appeared i n December 1878, S a u s s u r e was f r e e t o s t a r t on h i s d o c t o r a l
d i s s e r t a t i o n , De Z'erqZoi du g z n i t i f absoZu en sanscrit, d u r i n g h i s s t a y
a t B e r l i n U n i v e r s i t y , a s t u d y i n which h e made a n e x p l i c i t r e f e r e n c e t o
Whitney ' s Sanskrit Grammar i n t h e "Note B i b l i o g r a p h i q u e " (Cf . RecueiZ,
272), and which h e defended i n February 1880.
I n 1964, Emile B e n v e n i s t e n o t e d t h a t S a u s s u r e had commented i n h i s
c o u r s e on G o t h i c a t t h e U n i v e r s i t y of P a r i s (1885186) t h a t h e had c a r r i e d
t h e s c i e n t i f i c s t u d y of t h i s language f u r t h e r t h a n had g e n e r a l l y been
done and t h a t h e had a l s o o f f e r e d "quelques l e ~ o n sc o n s a c r 6 e s 2 d e s ggn-
6 r a l i t e s s u r l a mgthode l i n g u i s t i q u e e t l a v i e du langage" (AnnEPHE
1964165, p. 6 2 ) , and B e n v e n i s t e observed t h a t t h e l a s t e x p r e s s i o n i s t h e
t i t l e of Whitney's book whose t h i r d e d i t i o n , we may add, appeared i n
1880 when S a u s s u r e a r r i v e d i n p a r i s .I5 While o t h e r s a n a l y s e Whitney's
major work a s emphasizing t h e importance "de 11616ment i n d i v i d u e l , s o c i a l
et 6conomique, t r o i s f a c t e u r s q u i r g g i s s e n t l a langue, moyen d e communi-
c a t i o n " (Kukenheim, 1966:84) w i t h o u t drawing any r e l a t i o n between Whitney
and S a u s s u r e , a number of l i n g u i s t s c o n t e n t themselves t o n o t e t h a t
S a u s s u r e was a c q u a i n t e d w i t h La Vie du Zangage ( e . g . I o r d a n I A l v a r , 1967:
540, n.38; L o j a , l968:lO3). S i m i l a r l y , we a r e s u r p r i s e d t o n o t e t h a t
M. Leroy g i v e s t h e f o l l o w i n g c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n of Whitney's work w i t h o u t
b e i n g aware of t h e rapport between him and S a u s s u r e , t o whom h e d e v o t e s
much s p a c e (1963:63-74, and e l s e w h e r e ) :

Whitney, oppos6 2 t o u t mysticisme, c o n s i d & a i t l e l a n g a g e

( d o n t l a f o n c t i o n r6pond 2 un b e s o i n d e communication) comrne
une i n s t i t u t i o n humaine e t l e s mots c o m e d e s s i g n e s conven-
tionnels . (19 63 :39)

T h i s a p p a r e n t l a c k of f a m i l i a r i t y w i t h S a u s s u r e ' s (and/or Whitney's)

work o r want of awareness of t h e a l l t o o obvious s i m i l a r i t i e s between
t h e i r d o c t r i n e s i s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of many h i s t o r i a n s of l i n g u i s t i c s .
O t h e r s , however, f e e l themselves f r e e t o c l a i m t h e dependence of S a u s s u r e
on Whitney i n t h e development of a number of h i s l i n g u i s t i c c o n c e p t s
w i t h o u t f e e l i n g a t t h e same time t h e need f o r any t e x t u a l e v i d e n c e
( e . g . Mounin, 1967:6, 1 5 , 177, $16, 220-1; 1968: 1 7 , 22, 24, 52, 57,
and e l s e w h e r e ) , a p r o c e d u r e which c u l m i n a t e s i n T. B o l e l l i ' s a s s e r t i o n s
a p p a r e n t l y based on f i n d i n g s p u t forward by A . B . T e r r a c i n i many y e a r s
b e f o r e him and n o t h i s own.16 H i s c o n t e n t i o n s may b e summarized a s
follows: 1 ) The development of language poses a q u e s t i o n a b o u t t h e
r e l a t i o n s h i p between t h e i n d i v i d u a l and t h e speech community, t h e inno-
v a t i n g f o r c e of t h e i n d i v i d u a l and t h e c o n s e r v a t i v e f o r c e of t h e community.
B e s i d e s t h i s o b s e r v a t i o n a b o u t t h e n a t u r e of language which was i m p o r t a n t
t o S a u s s u r e o t h e r a s p e c t s of Whitney's d o c t r i n e come t o mind; 2)the
a f f i r m a t i o n t h a t language i s a system; 3 ) h i s view of morphological
o p p o s i t i o n i n language, and 4) a s a r e s u l t of t h e i m p l i c a t i o n s of a
n a t u r a l i s t i c and p o s i t i v i s t i c viewpoint, t h e a t t e m p t t o s t u d y language
f o r i t s e l f a s a n autonomous e n t i t y . 1 7 S i n c e B o l e l l i does n o t s u p p l y
s u f f i c i e n t e v i d e n c e f o r h i s c l a i m s n o r o f f e r any r e f e r e n c e t o t h e Saus-
s u r e a n C o w s o r o t h e r more r e c e n t l y p u b l i s h e d t e x t s from S a u s s u r e ' s pen,
i t w i l l b e t h e t a s k of t h e subsequent paragraphs of t h i s c h a p t e r t o
d e m o n s t r a t e Whitney's i n f l u e n c e on Saussurean l i n g u i s t i c t h o u g h t . By
c o n t r a s t w i t h o t h e r l i n g u i s t s of h i s t i m e whose work might have had some
impact on S a u s s u r e h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h and h i g h r e g a r d f o r Whitney i s
c o m p a r a t i v e l y w e l l documented, i . e . t h e r e e x i s t m a n u s c r i p t s from S a u s s u r e
h i m s e l f and n o t e s from h i s s t u d e n t s t a k e n d u r i n g h i s l e c t u r e s on g e n e r a l
l i n g u i s t i c s which g i v e s u f f i c i e n t e v i d e n c e f o r t h e f a c t t h a t S a u s s u r e
was w e l l a c q u a i n t e d w i t h Whitney's work.
A number of r e f e r e n c e s t o Whitney can b e found i n S a u s s u r e ' s own
papers. The most i m p o r t a n t document i n t h i s r e s p e c t i s a m a n u s c r i p t
which S a u s s u r e w r o t e i n ~ovember/December 1894 i n r e s p o n s e t o a n i n -
v i t a t i o n by t h e American P h i l o l o g i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n t o g i v e a n a p p r e c i a t i o n
of Whitney "as a comparative p h i l o l o g i s t " f o r a congress which was t o
t a k e p l a c e i n P h i l a d e l p h i a on December 28th of t h a t same y e a r i n com-
memoration of Whitney who had d i e d on J u n e 7, 1894 ( c f . SM, 3 2 ) . This
r e q u e s t a p p e a r s t o have g i v e n S a u s s u r e ample o p p o r t u n i t y t o g i v e an
a c c o u n t of Whitney's c o n t r i b u t i o n t o l i n g u i s t i c s c i e n c e and a t t h e same
t i m e t o c l a r i f y h i s own s t a n d p o i n t concerning t h e n a t u r e of language.
R e g r e t t a b l y , ( a s mentioned p r e v i o u s l y ) S a u s s u r e never completed h i s
a r t i c l e p r o b a b l y b e c a u s e , m e t i c d l o u s a s h e was, 1 ) he could not support
t h e i d e a t h a t Whitney a c t u a l l y had been a comparative p h i l o l o g i s t , and
2) h e d i d n o t have enough t i m e f o r completion of t h i s t a s k ( h e had r e -
c e i v e d t h e i n v i t a t i o n on November 1 0 , 1894). T h i s manuscript of some
s e v e n t y pages h a s n o t y e t been p u b l i s h e d , a l t h o u g h e x c e r p t s appeared i n
1954 (CFS 12:59-65) and a t e n t a t i v e a n a l y s i s h a s been made by Godel
18
(SM, 43-6, and e l s e w h e r e ) .
Another e x p l i c i t r e f e r e n c e t o Whitney can b e found i n a n o t h e r h i t h e r t o
u n p u b l i s h e d m a n u s c r i p t of s e v e n pages of an uncomplete review of Sechehaye's
Programme at mzthodes de Za Z i n g u i s t i q u e t h z o r i q u e of 1908 which h a s
a l s o b e e n a n a l y z e d by Godel (SM, 51-2). On t h e f i r s t page of t h i s manu-
s c r i p t S a u s s u r e had noted: "L'Americain Whitney, que j e rgv&e, n'a
jamais d i t un s e u l mot, s u r l e s mgmes s u j e t s [ i . e . t h e t h e o r y and method
of l i n g u i s t i c science], qui ne f h juste", adding, "mais comme t o u s l e s
a u t r e s [ l i n g u i s t s p a s t and p r e s e n t ] , il n e songe p a s que l a l a n g u e a i t
b e s o i n d ' u n e systgmatique" (SM, 5 1 ) . This q u o t a t i o n summarizes w e l l
S a u s s u r e ' s a t t i t u d e towards Whitney: on t h e one hand S a u s s u r e acknow-
l e d g e s Whitney's c o n t r i b u t i o n s t o l i n g u i s t i c s , and on t h e o t h e r h e s t a t e s
c l e a r l y h i s r e s e r v e and c r i t i c i s m .
The t h i r d s o u r c e i s , of c o u r s e , t h e Corns (18, 26, 1 1 0 ) , and e s p e c i a l l y
E n g l e r ' s c r i t i c a l e d i t i o n ( c f . CLG(E), 14-6, 33-4, 168-9 and e l s e w h e r e ) ;
t h e l a s t mentioned r e f e r e n c e t o Whitney i n t h e Corns r e v e a l s t h a t B a l l y
and Sechehaye must have based t h e p u b l i s h e d t e x t of CLG, 110 almost
e x c l u s i v e l y on S a u s s u r e ' s manuscript on Whitney of 1894, a f a c t which
19
a p p e a r s t o h a v e escaped Godel's n o t i c e ( c f . SM, 1 1 6 ) .
The most v a l u a b l e secondary s o u r c e i s unquestionably Godel 's 19 57
d i s s e r t a t i o n , and though h e h a r d l y e v e r q u o t e s from Whitney, h e h a s
p r o v i d e d a number of s u g g e s t i o n s which we cannot i g n o r e . 20 1n f a c t ,
Whitney a p p e a r s t o b e t h e o n l y p r e d e c e s s o r of S a u s s u r e whom Godel had
s t u d i e d c l o s e l y ; l i n g u i s t s s u c h a s Brugmann, ~ e l b r k k ,P a u l , G. von d e r
G a b e l e n t z , and o t h e r s have been passed o v e r i n s i l e n c e . But we cannot
r e p r o a c h Godel f o r t h e s e l a c u n a e , s i n c e t h e o b j e c t i v e of h i s monograph
was a r e a s s e s s m e n t of S a u s s u r e ' s o r i g i n a l thought and n o t a h i s t o r y of
 l i n g u i s t i c ideas.21 I n t e r e s t i n g l y , Godel makes no r e f e r e n c e t o t h e
'
French v e r s i o n of Whitney's L i f e 'and Growth of Language ( L G L ) , b u t o n l y
t o t h e English o r i g i n a l and t h e e a r l i e r Language and t h e Study of Language
(LSL), a procedure which we s h a l l n o t always f o l l o w a l t h o u g h i t a p p e a r s
t h a t S a u s s u r e used t h e E n g l i s h t e x t s i n c l a s s q u o t i n g from them f o r
i l l u s t r a t i o n of h i s own views. I n a number of c a s e s i n which we s h a l l
a t t e m p t t o r e l a t e Whitney's s t a t e m e n t s t o f o r m u l a t i o n s by S a u s s u r e La
V;e du Zangage (Vie) i s r e f e r r e d t o .
I n h i s n o t e s on Whitney of 1894, S a u s s u r e expressed h i s a p p r o v a l
of a number of s u g g e s t i o n s p u t forward by t h e American l i n g u i s t and a l s o
made s e v e r a l c r i t i c i s m s . S i n c e t h i s a r t i c l e , which was i n t e n d e d a s an
a p p r e c i a t i o n of Whitney's views, was n e v e r completed and c o n t a i n s many
e r a s u r e s , incomplete s e n t e n c e s , l a c u n a e , and l a c k s o r g a n i s a t i o n , we cannot
f o l l o w t h e t e x t t o o c l o s e l y b u t have t o s t r u c t u r e t h e c o n t e n t s a c c o r d i n g
t o what we b e l i e v e t o b e t h e major i s s u e s . D e s p i t e t h e i r somewhat f r a g -
mentary n a t u r e we can n e v e r t h e l e s s e x t r a c t from t h e s e n o t e s a number of
i d e a s and s t a t e m e n t s which a r e v e r y germane t o o u r p r e s e n t d i s c u s s i o n .
F i r s t l y , t h e r e i s a f a v o r a b l e g e n e r a l view of Whitney's work.
S a u s s u r e n o t e s t h a t t h e impersonal and broad approach c h a r a c t e r i s t i c
of Whitney's work g i v e s t h e i m p r e s s i o n t h a t t h e i d e a s e x p r e s s e d i n i t
were a l r e a d y common knowledge (1894 :l a ) , but s t r e s s e s t h a t h i s i d e a s were
i n f l u e n t i a l on t h e younger g e n e r a t i o n of l i n g u i s t s ( p . 2 a ) . Indeed
S a u s s u r e b e l i e v e s t h a t Whitney was t h e f i r s t g e n e r a l i z e r of l i n g u i s t i c
f a c t s who d i d n o t draw absurd c o n c l u s i o n s r e g a r d i n g language from t h e
work of (comparative?) grammar (p. 4 ) , and h e p r a i s e s two a s p e c t s of
Whitney's work: good g e n e r a l i z a t i o n s concerning language and a sound
method ( p . 5 ) . U n f o r t u n a t e l y S a u s s u r e n e v e r e x p a t i a t e d on t h i s v e r y
i n t e r e s t i n g a s p e c t of Whitney's l i n g u i s t i c t h o u g h t . Saussure - a s Whitney
had done b e f o r e him - 22 r i d i c u l e s p a r t i c u l a r l y t h e views of S c h l e i c h e r
a c c o r d i n g t o whom language was a l i v i n g organism (p. 6; c f . CFS 12:59)
and p r a i s e s Whitney f o r h i s m a t t e r - o f - f a c t approach. However, S a u s s u r e
n o t e s h i s r e s e r v e s vis-a'-vis Whitney:

L'impression g6nGrale q u i s e dggage des ouvrages < l i n g u i s t i q u e s

[ c r o s s e d o u t ] > d e Whitney e s t q u ' i l s u f f i t du < bon [ c r o s s e d o u t ]
changed, by f r e e human a c t i o n " (LSL, 1 5 2 ) , and t h a t "speech i s s t r i c t l y
a s o c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n " (437). In' a n o t h e r s e c t i o n of h i s book Whitney i s
even more e x p l i c i t on t h e s o c i a l a s p e c t of language:

Language i s a n i n s t i t u t i o n founded i n man's s o c i a l n a t u r e ,

wrought o u t f o r t h e s a t i s f a c t i o n of h i s s o c i a l wants; and
hence, w h i l e i n d i v i d u a l s a r e t h e s o l e u l t i m a t e a g e n t s
i n t h e f o r m a t i o n and m o d i f i c a t i o n of every word and meaning
of a word, i t i s s t i l l t h e community t h a t makes and changes
i t s language. (LSL, 177)

It s h o u l d b e added t h a t Whitney employs speech and language a s synonymous

terms; t h e f o l l o w i n g q u o t a t i o n might o t h e r w i s e b e e a s i l y misunderstood:
I1
Speech i s n o t a p e r s o n a l p o s s e s s i o n , b u t a s o c i a l ; it b e l o n g s n o t t o
t h e i n d i v i d u a l b u t t o t h e member of s o c i e t y " (LSL, 404). The d r i v i n g f o r c e
of human e x p r e s s i o n i s a p e r s o n ' s s o c i a l needs and i n s t i n c t s ; a s o l i t a r y
man would n e v e r "frame a language" ( i b i d . ) . I n f a c t , Whitney ( r i g h t l y )
o b s e r v e s , e x c l u s i o n from " t h e o r d i n a r y i n t e r c o u r s e of man w i t h man" (405)
would u l t i m a t e l y l e a d t o l o s s of speech. The s o c i a l a s p e c t of language
i s i n f a c t a c r u c i a l element i n Whitney's work ( c f . a l s o LSL, 48, 400;
LGL, 280, 309), b u t S a u s s u r e (CLG, 26) c r i t i c i z e d him i n t h a t h e d i d n o t
see t h e s p e c i a l c h a r a c t e r of language which makes i t d i s t i n c t from o t h e r
s o c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n s , e x c l u d i n g w r i t i n g (FdS, 1894:17 = CFS 1 2 : 6 0 ) , s i n c e
t h e r e i s no such r e l a t i o n between t h e n a t u r e of t h i n g s and t h e i r e x p r e s s i o n ,
s o t o speak:

Les autres i n s t i t u t i o n s , en ef f e t , < sont toutes > fondzes

< h des degrzs divers > sur Zes rapports NATURELS, < s u r
une convenance entre > des choses comme p r i n c i p e < f i n a l > .
P a r exemple, l e d r o i t d t u n e n a t i o n , ou l e systsme p o l i t i q u e ,
ou mzme l a mode d e son costume, ...(1894:17 = CFS 12:60 =
CLG(E), 1 6 8 ) .

S a u s s u r e e x p l a i n s t h a t a l l changes and i n n o v a t i o n s i n t h e s e i n s t i t u t i o n s
h a v e t h e i r s o u r c e i n t h e human mind, whereas h e emphasizes t h a t language
and w r i t i n g a r e not based on a n a t u r a l r e l a t i o n between t h i n g s ( c f . 1894:
1 8 = Zoc. c i t . ) . For S a u s s u r e language i s n o t only "une i n s t i t u t i o n
pure" ( a s Whitney p o i n t e d o u t f r e q u e n t l y ) , b u t more p a r t i c u l a r l y a n
i n s t i t u t i o n sans anaZogue (ibid. ; cf . Chomsky, 1968: 59f f ). .
These o b s e r v a t i o n s a r e r e l e v a n t t o a n o t h e r a s p e c t of ( t h e n a t u r e o f )
l a n g u a g e which S a u s s u r e mentions, b u t does n o t seem t o a t t r i b u t e t o Whitney:
 > s e n s commun -
du s e n s commun d ' u n e h o m e f a m i l i e r a v e c
[ ] s o i t pour f a i r e &an,ouir t o u s l e s fantGmes, s o i t
pour s a i s i r dans l e u r e s s e n c e l e s [ 1. O r c e t t e con-
v i c t i o n n ' e s t pas l a n 8 t r e . (FdS, 1894:38 = CFS 12:64)

Although we a r e , a t t h e p r e s e n t p o i n t , more p a r t i c u l a r l y concerned

w i t h Whitney, and S a u s s u r e ' s r e a c t i o n s t o h i s i d e a s , i t i s i m p o r t a n t t o
n o t e even e n p a s s a n t how advanced S a u s s u r e ' s own i d e a s were a t t h a t
t i m e on t h e n a t u r e of g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y . I n h i s notes he 1)
s t r e s s e d t h e n e c e s s i t y f o r r e f r a i n i n g from any analogy o u t s i d e t h e f i e l d
of language when d i s c u s s i n g i t s r e a l n a t u r e , 2) envisaged, on t h e o t h e r
hand, language a s r e p r e s e n t i n g n o t h i n g b u t "un cas p a r t i c u Z i e r d e l a
~ h g o r i edes ~ i g n e s " (1894: 38a = CFS 12:64) - even t h e term 's'emiologie'
i s used i n a f a m i l i a r s e n s e ( " l a s i complexe n a t u r e de l a s'emiologie
p a r t i c u l i s r e d i t e langage" [l894: 3 l ] ) , 3) p o i n t e d o u t t h a t h e had
f o s t e r e d "depuis b i e n d e s annges c e t t e c o n v i c t i o n que l a l i n g u i s t i q u e
e s t une s c i e n c e double" ( p . 14a) , 2 3 4) e x p r e s s e d h i s c o n v i c t i o n t h a t
r e l a t i o n s h i p s between l i n g u i s t i c elements would one day b e d e s c r i b e d
11p a r d e s formules math6matiques" (1894: 9) 24 .
Secondly, we b e l i e v e t h a t t h e r e a r e i n p a r t i c u l a r t h r e e a s p e c t s
of Whitney's o b s e r v a t i o n s about t h e n a t u r e of language which d e s e r v e
l e n g t h i e r discussion: 1 ) language a s a s o c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n , 2) t h e n a t u r e
of t h e language s i g n , and 3) t h e r e l a t i o n between t h e i n d i v i d u a l and
t h e l i n g u i s t i c community. F i n a l l y , a number of f u r t h e r n o t i o n s and
terms t o b e found i n Whitney's work w i l l b e d i s c u s s e d i n view of t h e i r
p o s s i b l e i n f l u e n c e on S a u s s u r e ' s l i n g u i s t i c terminology and t h e o r e t i c a l
11
arguments, e.g. [ s o c i a l ] intercourse", langue v s . Zangage, system,
I
v a l u e , z&o.
S a u s s u r e , when r e l a t i n g t h e s e views on t h e n a t u r e of language g e n e r a l l y
h e l d i n t h e 1 9 t h c e n t u r y , was s t r u c k by Whitney's a f f i r m a t i o n t h a t language
i s a n i n s t i t u t i o n , a s t a t e m e n t which "a chang6 l ' a x e d e l a l i n g u i s t i q u e "
(1894:17 = CFS 12:60). It i s n o t n e c e s s a r y t o r e c a l l t h e o p i n i o n s pro-
pounded by Max Miiller, S c h l e i c h e r , S t e i n t h a l and o t h e r s t o i n d i c a t e
t h a t Whitney's views on language d e v i a t e d e s s e n t i a l l y from t h e v i s t a s
of h i s time. A s e a r l y a s i n 1867 h e p o i n t e d o u t t h a t language "is n o t a
p h y s i c a l p r o d u c t , b u t a human i n s t i t u t i o n , p r e s e r v e d , p e r p e t u a t e d , and
language a s a system of s i g n s (1894:38) and a p a r t i c u l a r semiology ( 3 1 ) .
I n f a c t , Whitney had observed th'at " t h e t r u e n a t u r e of language [ i s
t o b e s e e n ] a s a system of a r b i t r a r y s i g n s f o r thought" (LSL, 410), and
t h a t even " t h e most p e r f e c t system of s i g n s , t h e most r i c h l y developed
language, l e a d s only t o p a r t i a l comprehension" (LSL, 111) .
It i s because t h e Cows (110) r e c o r d s a p a r t i c u l a r mention of Whitney
i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h t h e a r b i t r a r i n e s s of t h e language s i g n ( a r e f e r e n c e
which i s a c t u a l l y based on S a u s s u r e ' s u n f i n i s h e d a r t i c l e of 1894, c f .
CLG(E), 168-9), t h a t t h e n a t u r e of t h e l i n g u i s t i c s i g n h a s t o b e d i s c u s s e d
here. According t o t h e Cours, Whitney made a c o n n e c t i o n between t h e
n a t u r e of language a s a s o c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n and t h e a r b i t r a r y c h a r a c t e r
of t h e l i n g u i s t i c s i g n . I t i s worth p o i n t i n g o u t t h a t Whitney emphasized
r e p e a t e d l y t h a t t h e s i g n s a r e a r b i t r a r y ( c f . LSL, 1 4 , 32, 71, 102, 410,
438; LGL, 19, 24, 48, 77, 282; Vie 1 5 , 20, 40-1, 65, 232) i n t h e s e n s e
t h a t t h e r e e x i s t s no n a t u r a l t i e between t h e word and t h e o b j e c t i t s i g n i -
fies. C h a r a c t e r i s t i c a l l y , i n most of Whitney's f o r m u l a t i o n s we f i n d
t h a t " a r b i t r a r y " and "conventional" o c c u r i n t h e same extended c o l l o c a t i o n
(e.g. LSL, 1 4 , 32) ;25 t h e c o n v e n t i o n a l i t y of words is simply e x p l a i n e d
by t h e f a c t t h a t they a r e made up by t h e s p e a k e r s and a r e n o t i n h e r e n t
i n t h e t h i n g s they denote.26 I n t h e p r o c e s s of language a c q u i s i t i o n
Whitney h o l d s , "every v o c a b l e was t o us an a r b i t r a r y and c o n v e n t i o n a l
s i g n ; a r b i t r a r y b e c a u s e any one of t h e thousand o t h e r v o c a b l e s could
h a v e b e e n j u s t a s e a s i l y l e a r n e d by u s and a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e same
i d e a ; c o n v e n t i o n a l , b e c a u s e t h e one we a c q u i r e d had i t s s o l e ground and
s a n c t i o n i n t h e c o n s e n t i n g usage of t h e community of which we formed a
p a r t " (LSL, 14; c f . LGL, 19; V<e, 1 5 ) . The o n l y bond c o n n e c t i n g words
w i t h t h e i r meanings a r e mental a s s o c i a t i o n s which a r e e s t a b l i s h e d when
l e a r n i n g a g i v e n language (LSL, 1 4 , 71, 128, 409-10). It i s i n t e r e s t i n g
t o n o t e t h a t S a u s s u r e a p p e a r s t o summarize Whitney's i d e a s when h e w r o t e
i n 1894: "< I1 s u f f i t de d i r e que l a f o r c e des s i g n e s e s t de s a n a t u r e
c o n v e n t i o n n e l l e , de s a n a t u r e a r b i t r a i r e , d e s a n a t u r e indgpendante
d e s r 6 a l i t 6 s q u ' i l s d g s i g n e n t , pour v o i r que c e n ' e s t pas du t o u t 12,
dans l e bagage de 11humanit6, un a r t i c l e comparable 2 d'autres [ 1"
(p. 1 3 a ) . I n f a c t S a u s s u r e h e r e draws r i g o r o u s c o n c l u s i o n s from i d e a s
p u t forward q u i t e u n s y s t e m a t i c a l l y i n Whitney's work i n a n t i c i p a t i o n
of h i s l e c t u r e s on g e n e r a l l i n g d i s t i c s i n which h e e s t a b l i s h e d t h e a r b i t r a r y
n a t u r e of t h e l i n g u i s t i c s i g n a s an i m p o r t a n t p r i n c i p l e of s y n c h r o n i c
l i n g u i s t i c s (cf . CLG, 100f .) .
I n t h e same m a n u s c r i p t , S a u s s u r e f r e q u e n t l y u s e s t h e term "symbol"
( c f . CLG, 101) f o r what h e l a t e r c o n s i s t e n t l y c a l l e d "sign" (1894:13)
and seems t o have d i s t i n g u i s h e d between i d e a and s i g n ( 1 2 ) , a s d i d Whitney
who c h a r a c t e r i z e d words a s "not e x a c t models of i d e a s " b u t "merely s i g n s
f o r i d e a s " (LSL, 20; s. a l s o 32, 70-1, 111; c f . F i r t h ' s " s u b s t i t u t i o n -
c o u n t e r s " [PiL, 2 0 f . l ) . A t f i r s t s i g h t i t appears a s i f Whitney was
s u g g e s t i n g t h e Saussurean dichotomy between s i g n i f i g and s i g n i f i a n t
(CLG, 99, 1 4 4 ) , and indeed S a u s s u r e ' s e a r l y d i s t i n c t i o n between image
a c o u s t i q u e and concept (CLG, 28, 98) i s r a t h e r c l o s e t o t h e c o n t r a s t made
by Whitney; S a u s s u r e d i d n o t i n t r o d u c e t h e s i g n i f i 6 / s i g n i f i a n t distinction
b e f o r e h i s t h i r d c o u r s e (1910/11) which makes up t h e language s i g n ( s . SM,
105; CLG, 99) . A s f o r t h e s e m a n t i c s of t h e a r b i t r a i r e w e can o b s e r v e
a s i m i l a r e v o l u t i o n i n S a u s s u r e ' s terminology. For Whitney t h e a r b i t r a r y
n a t u r e of t h e s i g n ( = word, vocable) was s e e n i n t h e f a c t t h a t ( a t i t s
o r i g i n a t l e a s t ) any such s i g n could d e s i g n a t e a g i v e n o b j e c t o r e x p r e s s
a given idea.27 I n h i s f i n a l u n d e r s t a n d i n g of t h e a r b i t r a i r e S a u s s u r e
was no l o n g e r concerned w i t h t h e o b j e c t d e s i g n a t e d by t h e s i g n , b u t w i t h
t h e r e l a t i o n between t h e meaning ( " s i g n i f i c a t i o n " ) of a language s i g n
and t h e combination of sounds t o which i t i s a t t a c h e d ( c f . CLG, 100).
Both c o n c e p t s , however, t h e b i l a t e r a l c h a r a c t e r and t h e a r b i t r a r y n a t u r e
of t h e l i n g u i s t i c s i g n , h a v e t h e i r s o u r c e i n Whitney, though S a u s s u r e
developed h i s i d e a s f u r t h e r towards a t h e o r y of s i g n s , a semiology ,
a l r e a d y h i n t e d a t i n 1894, t h e n o u t l i n e d i n 1901 ( i n N a v i l l e ' s NouveZZe
CZassification) , and u l t i m a t e l y p u t forward i n h i s l e c t u r e s on g e n e r a l
linguistics ( c f . CLG, 33-5, 1 0 0 f f . , 107, 1 1 1 ) .
The t h i r d major p o i n t i n Whitney's u n d e r s t a n d i n g of t h e n a t u r e of
language i s t h e r e l a t i o n between t h e i n d i v i d u a l ( s p e a k e r ) and t h e (speech)
community. On t h i s s u b j e c t , Godel makes f r e q u e n t r e f e r e n c e s t o Whitney
i n h i s l e n g t h y d i s c u s s i o n of S a u s s u r e ' s Zangue/paroZe dichotomy (SM,
142-159). According t o Whitney a l l changes w i t h i n language have t h e i r
u l t i m a t e s o u r c e i n t h e 'work' of i n d i v i d u a l s ( c f . LSL, 3 6 f f . , 123-4,
125, 148, 154-5, 404); however, ' t h e i n d i v i d u a l ' s i n f l u e n c e i s g e n e r a l l y
r a t h e r weak, and n o t h i n g w i l l b e i n c o r p o r a t e d i n t h e language u n l e s s
t h e s p e e c h community approves of i t and a c c e p t s i t . The manner i n which
i n d i v i d u a l and community i n t e r a c t i n b r i n g i n g about language development
i s e x p l a i n e d by Whitney a s f o l l o w s :

Speech and t h e changes of speech a r e t h e work of t h e community;

b u t t h e community cannot a c t e x c e p t through t h e i n i t i a t i v e of
i t s i n d i v i d u a l members, which i t f o l l o w s o r r e j e c t s . (LSL, 45;
c f . a l s o {bid., 123, 148, 404)

I n h i s book of 1875 Whitney s t a t e d e x p l i c i t l y t h a t t h e "community's s h a r e

i n t h e work [ o f language-making] i s dependent on and c o n d i t i o n e d by t h e
s i m p l e f a c t t h a t language i s n o t an i n d i v i d u a l p o s s e s s i o n , b u t a s o c i a l ' '
(LGL, 1 4 9 ) . Here w e n o t e t h e o p p o s i t i o n of s o c i a l v e r s u s i n d i v i d u a l
which S a u s s u r e was t o u s e i n o r d e r t o make a d i s t i n c t i o n between langue
and parole ( c f . CLG, 3O), and which i n t h e h i s t o r y of l i n g u i s t i c s i s
t r a d i t i o n a l l y t r a c e d back t o s o c i o l o g i c a l t h e o r i e s o r t h e i r o r i g i n a t o r s ,
i n p a r t i c u l a r Durkheim and Tarde. 28 It i s d o u b t f u l , however, whether
Whitney, i n s p i t e of t h i s u s e of t h e dichotomy, i n some way a n t i c i p a t e d
S a u s s u r e ' s c o n c e p t of parole (which h e d i d n o t i n t r o d u c e b e f o r e 1 9 0 8 ) ,
and we s a y t h i s d e s p i t e T e r r a c i n i ' s (1949 :108) s u g g e s t i o n . Strangely
enough, Whitney n e v e r d i s t i n g u i s h e d c l e a r l y between speech and language
b u t employed t h e s e terms synonymously ( c f . LSL, 400 v s . 437). On t h e
o t h e r hand, however, Whitney a p p e a r s t o have been q u i t e c l o s e t o S a u s s u r e ' s
i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f Zangue when h e d e f i n e d language a s "a system of sounds
w i t h i n t e l l i g i b l e c o n t e n t " (LSL, 49) and t h i s i s r e i n f o r c e d by Whitney's
c l a i m t h a t l a n g u a g e "has, i n f a c t , no e x i s t e n c e s a v e i n t h e minds and
mouths of t h o s e who u s e i t " (LSL, 35) .29 I n t h i s c o n t e x t i t would perhaps
b e r e l e v a n t t o r e f e r t o S a u s s u r e ' s d e f i n i t i o n s (of which i n c i d e n t a l l y
t h e r e a r e s e v e r a l ) of language t o b e found i n t h e Cours t o s u p p o r t o u r
claim, and we would draw p a r t i c u l a r a t t e n t i o n t o h i s f r e q u e n t a f f i r m a t i o n
t h a t language is a system of ( a r b i t r a r y ) s i g n s ( c f . CLG, 33, 106, 1 1 6 ) ,
t h a t i t i s a s o c i a l f a c t ( 2 1 ) , something l e a r n e d and c o n v e n t i o n a l (25)
c r e a t e d and f u r n i s h e d by t h e c o l l e c t i v i t y ( 2 7 ) , e t c . On t h e o t h e r hand,
we n o t e t h a t h e s t a t e d t h a t b a s i c a l l y " t o u t e s t psychologique dans l a
langue" (CLG, 21) and t h a t l i n g u ' i s t i c s i g n s a r e e s s e n t i a l l y p s y c h i c a l
i n n a t u r e (32).
The above argument concerning t h e i n f l u e n c e on S a u s s u r e of t h e s e
t h r e e major a s p e c t s of Whitney 's l i n g u i s t i c views ( i . e . 1 ) language a s
a social institution, 2) t h e n a t u r e of t h e language s i g n , and 3) t h e
r e l a t i o n between t h e i n d i v i d u a l and t h e community i n language) does
touch upon o t h e r q u e s t i o n s r a i s e d i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h Whitney's i n f l u e n c e
on S a u s s u r e , i n p a r t i c u l a r t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between langage and langue
and t h e s y s t e m a t i c c h a r a c t e r of language. A s f a r a s t h e f i r s t of t h e s e
q u e s t i o n s i s concerned, Whitney d i d i n f a c t n o t e t h e double s e n s e of t h e
term (LGL, 324) and b e l i e v e d t h a t t h e two meanings have g e n e r a l l y been
confused by s t u d e n t s of language. He gave t h e f o l l o w i n g e x p l a n a t i o n :
'Nan p o s s e s s e s , a s one of h i s most marked and d i s t i n c t i v e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s ,
a f a c u l t y o r c a p a c i t y of speech - , or, more a c c u r a t e l y , v a r i o u s f a c u l t i e s
and c a p a c i t i e s which l e a d i n e v i t a b l y t o t h e p r o d u c t i o n of speech: b u t
t h e f a c u l t i e s a r e one t h i n g , and t h e i r e l a b o r a t e d p r o d u c t s a r e a n o t h e r
and v e r y d i f f e r e n t one." Here, we b e l i e v e , i s t h e d i r e c t s o u r c e of
S a u s s u r e ' s d i s t i n c t i o n between langue and facult; du langage ( c f . CLG,
25; CLG(E) , 32) ; Whitney 's d i s t i n c t i o n between langue and langue h a s
1 2
.
a l r e a d y been r e f e r r e d t o above ( c f o u r q u o t a t i o n , n . 2 9 ) .
As f o r t h e s y s t e m a t i c n a t u r e of language, a number of r e f e r e n c e s
can b e found i n Whitney t o s u g g e s t t h a t h e was one of S a u s s u r e ' s s o u r c e s
of i n s p i r a t i o n ( c f . LSL, 49, 111, 410; LGL, 7 6 ) . When a t t e m p t i n g t o l i s t
t h e sounds of E n g l i s h , Whitney, f o l l o w i n g Richard Lepsius ' (1810-1815)
well-known programme,30 and s t a t e d t h a t a "spoken a l p h a b e t , ...,
i n o r d e r t o b e understood, must b e a r r a n g e d upon a p h y s i o l o g i c a l p l a n . "
And h e adds: "It i s no chaos, b u t a n o r d e r l y system of a r t i c u l a t i o n s ,
w i t h t i e s of r e l a t i o n s h i p running through i t i n every d i r e c t i o n " (LSL,
91). S i m i l a r i d e a s a r e e x p r e s s e d e l s e w h e r e ( c f . LSL, 265, 464; LGL,
62, 6 7 ) . I t must b e s a i d , however, t h a t t h e s e o b s e r v a t i o n s n e v e r d i d
become a x i o m a t i c i n Whitney's s t u d i e s of language b u t remained m a r g i n a l ,
e s p e c i a l l y when compared t o t h e manner i n which S a u s s u r e developed h i s
t h e o r y of language, t h e main f o u n d a t i o n of which was c o n s t r u c t e d on t h e
assumption t h a t language i s a system of i n t e r d e p e n d e n t t e r n s ( t o u s e
1

S a u s s u r e ' s own e x p r e s s i o n which however h a s n o t been r e c o g n i z e d a s a

31
t e c h n i c a l term by t h e e d i t o r s of t h e Cours).
There a r e i n a d d i t i o n a c e r t a i n number of s t a t e m e n t s made by Whitney
e n p a s s a n t which appear t o have been t a k e n up by S a u s s u r e (though o t h e r
s o u r c e s could b e e n v i s a g e d ) , 32 b u t t h r e e more ' Saussurean' terms i n
particular merit special discussion: intercourse, valew, and x&o.
With r e g a r d t o t h e f i r s t e x p r e s s i o n , Godel (SM, 265) l i s t i n g i t
i n h i s "Lexique d e l a t e r m i n o l o g i e [ s a u s s u r i e n n e ] " (SM, 252-81), makes
r e f e r e n c e t o Whitney's u s e of t h e e x p r e s s i o n ' c o h e s i v e f o r c e f ( r e p r e s e n t e d
by c u l t u r e and e n l i g h t e n m e n t , LSL, 1 5 9 ) , which g i v e s u n i t y t o a g i v e n
language and checks a l l t h e d i v e r s i f y i n g t e n d e n c i e s i n speech, and a l s o
t o Whitney's l a t e r u s e of t h e opposing f o r c e s i n language development,
t h e c e n t r i f u g a l and t h e c e n t r i p e t a l f o r c e s (LGL, 163-4; c f . LSL, 154-5).
I n t h e C o w s , when d i s c u s s i n g t h e same phenomenon, we f i n d t h a t S a u s s u r e
d i s t i n g u i s h e d between t h e " e s p r i t p a r t i c u l a r i s t e " o r " e s p r i t d e c l o c h e r "
on t h e one hand and t h e " f o r c e d " i n t e r c o u r s e ' , q u i c r g e l e s communications
e n t r e l e s hommes" (CLG, 281) on t h e o t h e r . The c r i t i c a l e d i t i o n of t h e
C o w s shows t h a t S a u s s u r e d i d n o t u s e t h e e x p r e s s i o n " e s p r i t " , b u t spoke
of opposing f o r c e s , " l a f o r c e du c l o c h e r " , and "la f o r c e de l ' i n t e r c o u r s e "
(CLG(E), 465). The u s e of t h e word f o r c e i n b o t h i n s t a n c e s a s w e l l
a s t h e emphasis on t h e communicational d r i v e i n man's n a t u r e s u g g e s t s
Whitney a s t h e immediate s o u r c e of S a u s s u r e ' s dichotomy, i n p a r t i c u l a r
when we n o t e i n Whitney t h a t "communication i s t h e l e a d i n g d e t e r m i n a t i v e
f o r c e throughout" (LGL, 286; c f . LSL, 155) i n t h e development and t h e
a c q u i s i t i o n of language and t h a t t h i s f o r c e "determines t h e u n i t y of a
language, and p u t s a r e s t r a i n t upon i t s d i a l e c t v a r i a t i o n " , an obser-
v a t i o n which i s p a r a l l e l e d i n t h e C o w s ( s . CLG, 282; CLG(E), 467-8).
On a n o t h e r o c c a s i o n Godel, i n a d d i t i o n t o n o t i n g t h a t t h i s concept
of opposing f o r c e s was n o t i n t r o d u c e d by S a u s s u r e u n t i l h i s t h i r d c o u r s e
(l9lO/ll), states that 1 ) t h e word " i n t e r c o u r s e " was employed by S a u s s u r e
a s e a r l y a s i n 1891 i n h i s t h i r d l e c t u r e a t Geneva U n i v e r s i t y , and
that 2) t h i s word was l i s t e d i n Emile ~ i t t r g ' s(1801-81) voluminous
D i c t i o n n a i r e d e la langue f r a n c a i s e ( c f . SM, 78, n.83) whose f i r s t e d i t i o n
appeared i n P a r i s d u r i n g t h e y e a r s 1863-72, i . e . roughly about t h e same
t i m e a s Whitney ' s books appeared. 33 Godel does n o t , however, mention
Whitney i n t h i s c o n n e c t i o n ( c f . a l s o SM, 265), a l t h o u g h i n f a c t , a f t e r
having o u t l i n e d t h e two opposing f o r c e s which a c c o u n t f o r t h e growth of
language and d i a l e c t s (LSL, 154-5), Whitney, i n h i s book of 1867, had
a l r e a d y used t h e term ' i n t e r c o u r s e ' q u i t e e x p l i c i t l y i n conjunction with
i t s b a l a n c i n g and speech s t a n d a r d i z i n g f u n c t i o n . 3 4 It seems s a f e t o s a y
t h e r e f o r e t h a t t h e term could n o t have escaped S a u s s u r e ' s n o t i c e and
p a r t i c u l a r l y f o r two r e a s o n s : 1 ) t h e e x p r e s s i o n i s found i n a f a m i l i a r
.
c o n t e x t ( S a u s s u r e d e r i v e d t h e concept of opposing f o r c e s i n language
and t h e i r mechanism and development from Whitney), and 2) t h e r e a r e
i n d i c a t i o n s t h a t t h i s t e r m was f r e q u e n t l y used i n Whitney's w r i t i n g s
( c f . LSL, 405; LGL, l o ) , d e s p i t e t h e f a c t t h a t i t does nor seem t o have
b e e n used by Whitney a s a t e c h n i c a l term ( s i n c e n e i t h e r of t h e i n d i c e s
of Whitney's books [ c f . LSL, 497; LGL, 3241 l i s t s t h i s e x p r e s s i o n ) .
The second e x p r e s s i o n , uaZeur, p e r t a i n s t o t h e concept of v a l u e i n
language which p l a y s a n i m p o r t a n t r 6 l e i n S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r y (CW,155-69
[ p a s s i m ] ) , i n p a r t i c u l a r i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h t h e problem of t h e l i n g u i s t i c
sign. Godel on t h i s t o p i c (SM, 280-1) makes no r e f e r e n c e t o Whitney,
and t h e i n d i c e s of Whitney's books on g e n e r a l p r i n c i p l e s of l a n g u a g e
have no e n t r y which would s u g g e s t t h a t h e e v e r used t h e e x p r e s s i o n "value"
a s a t e c h n i c a l term. I n t e r e s t i n g l y , S a u s s u r e u s e s uaZem i n h i s u n f i n i s h e d
paper on Whitney of 1894 a l b e i t i n a t y p i c a l Saussurean s e n s e . 35 However,
Whitney d i d employ t h e term on o c c a s i o n s , f o r i n s t a n c e h e n o t e d t h a t
language ''would b e h a l f s p o i l e d f o r our u s e by t h e n e c e s s i t y of b e a r i n g
i n mind why and how i t s c o n s t i t u e n t s h a v e t h e v a l u e we g i v e them", h i s
argument b e i n g t h a t t h e i n t e r n a l (semantic) development of language
could b e v e r y s e r i o u s l y i n t e r f e r e d w i t h by a n immoderate c o n s c i o u s n e s s
of t h e etymology of words (LSL, 1 3 2 ) . I n t h e same paragraph Whitney
c r i t i c i z e s t h o s e who b e l i e v e t h a t Sprachsinn i m p l i e s a " d i s p o s i t i o n t o
r e t a i n i n memory t h e o r i g i n a l status and v a l u e [ s i c ] of f o r m a t i v e elements
[ i n language]" ( i b i d . ) . I t should b e p o i n t e d o u t t h a t Whitney does n o t
u s e t h e e x p r e s s i o n "meaning" i n t h i s c o n t e x t which would seem t h e most
u s u a l e x p r e s s i o n a t hand. ~ G w e v e rt h i s p a r t i c u l a r u s e of "value" by
Whitney does n o t prove t h a t S a u s s u r e t o o k i t from him. P a s s a g e s we h a v e
come a c r o s s w h i l e p e r u s i n g t h e French t r a n s l a t i o n of L i f e a n d Growth
appear t o b e much c l o s e r t o S a u s s u r e ' s l a t e r u s e of t h e term va2eu.r.
I n t h i s c h a p t e r devoted t o s e m a n t i c change (Vie, 64-82) Whitney employed
t h i s e x p r e s s i o n on s e v e r a l o c c a s i o n s d i s t i n g u i s h i n g , though n o t a x i o -
36
m a t i c a l l y , between s i g n i f i c a t i o n , s i g n , and v a l u e (Vie, 7 9 ) , using i t
i n t h e s e n s e of word meaning ( 6 5 ) , and, towards t h e end of t h e c h a p t e r ,
i n t h e s e n s e of f u n c t i o n when h e e x p l a i n e d t h a t t h e " s i g n e s d g m o n s t r a t i f s
e t interrogatifs", f o r i n s t a n c e who, which, e t c . received "leur valeur
c o m e pronoms r e l a t i f s " (81) much l a t e r i n t h e development of E n g l i s h .
However, nowhere does Whitney a t t e m p t any d e f i n i t i o n of t h e term.
Another i n s t a n c e i n which Whitney employed t h e e x p r e s s i o n of v a l u e
i s i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h t h e concept of z e r o i n l i n g u i s t i c s . S a u s s u r e had
used t h i s term a l r e a d y i n h i s Mdrnoire on two o c c a s i o n s , 3 7 a term which
we b e l i e v e h e t o o k o v e r from mathematics. Godel (SM, 281) r e p r o d u c e s
a n o t e t a k e n by a s t u d e n t d u r i n g S a u s s u r e ' s l e c t u r e s on g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s
which r u n s a s f o l l o w s : "I1 y a t o u j o u r s l e s i g n e c o n c r e t $ l a b a s e ,
msme quand l e s i g n e a r r i v e $ s t r e z6ro." This i n t e r e s t i n g quotation,
which a p p e a r s t o a n t i c i p a t e Chomsky's d i s t i n c t i o n between s u r f a c e and
deep s t r u c t u r e , i s i l l u s t r a t e d by t h e E n g l i s h s e n t e n c e "the man I have
seen", and t h e n o t e concludes: "I1 y a 12 une u n i t 6 rendue p a r z6r01'
b i d . . S u r p r i s i n g l y , Godel, who h a s made f r e q u e n t r e f e r e n c e t o Whitney
i n t h e d i s c u s s i o n of v a r i o u s o t h e r i t e m s i n h i s g l o s s a r y of Saussurean
l i n g u i s t i c terminology,38 does n o t r e f e r t o Whitney on t h i s o c c a s i o n .
However, when d i s c u s s i n g t h e problem of z e r o elements i n language a t some
l e n g t h (SM, 2l8-20), Godel makes e x p l i c i t r e f e r e n c e t o Whitney (218-9,
and n o t e 303). With r e f e r e n c e t o t h e p a s s a g e quoted above (which Godel
h a s reproduced more f u l l y ) , h e s t a t e s t h a t Whitney had made a s i m i l a r
o b s e r v a t i o n when d i s c u s s i n g morphological n o t a t i o n s . I n f a c t Whitney
r e j e c t e d t h e i d e a t h a t a s e n t e n c e s u c h a s " f i s h l i k e water" c o n s i s t s
of words which a r e r o o t s , adding: " . . . nor can i t b e s a i d t h a t , even
a s t h e y s t a n d , t h e y a r e a l t o g e t h e r f o r m l e s s ; f o r each i s d e f i n e d i n
c e r t a i n r e l a t i o n s by t h e absence of f o r m a t i v e elements which i t would
otherwise exhibit: w a t e r i s shown t o b e s i n g u l a r by l a c k i n g an s , f i s h
and Zike t o b e p l u r a l by t h e a b s e n c e of s from l i k e 1 ' (LSL, 365, n . ) .
Godel concedes t h a t Whitney h a d ' o b s e r v e d t h i s f a c t b e f o r e S a u s s u r e b u t
does n o t b e l i e v e t h a t t h i s would have had any b e a r i n g on S a u s s u r e P s
t h e o r i z i n g (SM, 220) b e c a u s e S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r y was much more powerful.
We c a n a t l e a s t q u o t e a more s u g g e s t i v e passage from Whitney t h a n t h a t
r e l a t e d by Godel (SM, 219). After pointing out t h a t t h e d i s t i n c t i o n
between m a t e r i a l and form i n language whose i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p had been
d i s c u s s e d on s e v e r a l occasion^,^^ Whitney i l l u s t r a t e s h i s views i n t h e
f o l l o w i n g manner:

The s of b r o o k s , f o r example, i s formal i n r e l a t i o n t o brook

a s m a t e r i a l ; t h e added l e t t e r i n d i c a t e s something s u b o r d i n a t e ,
a m o d i f i c a t i o n of t h e c o n c e p t i o n of brook, t h e e x i s t e n c e of
i t i n more t h a n one i n d i v i d u a l : i t t u r n s a s i n g u l a r i n t o a
p l u r a l . Men h a s t h e l i k e v a l u e [!I a s r e g a r d s man, t h e means
of making t h e same f o r m a l d i s t i n c t i o n having come t o b e of
a d i f f e r e n t kind from t h e o t h e r , a s a n i n t e r n a l change i n s t e a d
of a n e x t e r n a l . Brooks and men a r e n o t mere m a t e r i a l ; t h e y
are 'formed' m a t e r i a l , s i g n s f o r c o n c e p t i o n s w i t h one i m p o r t a n t
c h a r a c t e r i s t i c , number, added. But t h e n , by s i m p l e c o n t r a s t
w i t h them, brook and man a r e a l s o 'formed'; each i m p l i e s , n o t
by a s i g n , b u t by t h e absence of a n o t h e r w i s e n e c e s s a r y s i g n
t o t h e c o n t r a r y , r e s t r i c t i o n t o a s i n g l e a r t i c l e of t h e k i n d
named. (LGL, 214). 40

What i s most i m p o r t a n t t o n o t e from t h e above q u o t a t i o n i s t h e f a c t

t h a t w e f i n d t h e word "value" b e i n g used i n a way s i m i l a r t o t h a t i n
which S a u s s u r e employed i t , namely a s a f u n c t i o n o r meaning of a g i v e n
element w i t h i n a s p e c i f i c paradigm o r system ( c f . SM, 280-1; LTS, 52-3;
CLG, 159-61). On t h e o t h e r hand one might w e l l a s k whether i n f a c t t h e
t e r m "opposition" a s i t i s t o b e found i n t h e French t r a n s l a t i o n of
Whitney's L i f e a n d Grmth of Language ( c f . n.40) a s w e l l a s t h e u s e of
t h e opposing terms of a b s e n c e v e r s u s p r e s e n c e of formal d i s t i n c t i o n
d i d n o t indeed l e a d S a u s s u r e t o c l a r i f y h i s i d e a s concerning t h e p a r t i c u l a r
u s e o f t h e term "zero" i n l i n g u i s t i c a n a l y s i s a l t h o u g h t h e term i t s e l f
was n e v e r employed by Whitney. The s i m i l a r i t y between Whitney's n o t i o n
of t h e a b s e n c e of a formal s i g n a s a g a i n s t i t s p r e s e n c e and S a u s s u r e ' s
c o n c e p t of " s i g n e z&o" i s v e r y s t r i k i n g indeed. Speaking of t h e Czech
paradigm r e g a r d i n g t h e word "zzna" "woman", Saussure observes t h a t t h e
g e n i t i v e p l u r a l form "z&" h a s z e r o a s exposant adding: "On v o i t donc
 qu'un s i g n e m a t e r i e l n ' e s t p a s n g c e s s a i r e pour exprimer une i d & e ; l a
langue p e u t s e c o n t e n t e r de 1 ' 0 ~ ~ o s i t i odne quelque chose avec r i e n "
41
(CLG, 123-4), a " s i g n e ze'ro".
I n summing up we can s a y t h a t Whitney was i n many r e s p e c t s a n impor-
t a n t s o u r c e , i f n o t t h e most i m p o r t a n t one, of S a u s s u r e ' s l i n g u i s t i c
inspiration. B o l e l l i ' s c l a i m s (1965:152) r e f e r r e d t o a t t h e b e g i n n i n g
of t h i s c h a p t e r can now b e s u b s t a n t i a t e d : 1 ) Whitney d i d i l l u s t r a t e
c o n v i n c i n g l y t h e opposing f a c t o r s i n t h e l i f e and development of language,
t h e i n n o v a t i n g f o r c e of t h e i n d i v i d u a l and t h e c o n s e r v a t i v e f o r c e of t h e
community, b u t a l t h o u g h h e a n t i c i p a t e d t h e i n d i v i d u a l / s o c i a l dichotomy,
we cannot s u p p o r t Devoto's (1949: 4) c o n t e n t i o n t h a t Whitney f o r e s t a l l e d
t h e Saussurean dichotomy of langue v e r s u s 2) t h e s y s t e m a t i c
c h a r a c t e r of language was s t r e s s e d by Whitney q u i t e f r e q u e n t l y , b u t h e
was s u r e l y n o t a l o n e ; S c h l e i c h e r had p u t forward t h i s a s p e c t p r i o r t o
Whitney ( c f . LSL, 364; LGL, 76); n o r d i d Whitney e v e r draw from h i s
o b s e r v a t i o n s c o n c l u s i o n s s i m i l a r t o t h o s e of Saussure; 3) Whitney d i d
a n t i c i p a t e t h e concept of morphological o p p o s i t i o n i n language, and
4) argued f o r t h e s t u d y of language f o r i t s e l f ( c f . LSL, 4 6 f f . ) f r e e i n g
l i n g u i s t i c s c i e n c e from t h e t u t e l a g e of o t h e r s c i e n c e s , n o t a b l y b i o l o g y ,
p h y s i o l o g y , and psychology. But a number of o t h e r p o i n t s s h o u l d b e
added i n which Whitney seems t o have played a n i m p o r t a n t r z l e i n t h e
development of Saussurean l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y ; 5) t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between
langue and facuZtZ du Zangage (and a l s o s e t t i n g a s i d e language a s t h e
p r o p e r t y of a g i v e n l i n g u i s t i c community, e . g . a n a t i o n ) ; 6 ) t h e terms
of " ( s o c i a l ) i n t e r c o u r s e " and "valeur" and 7) t h e n o t i o n of t h e z e r o
s i g n (though n o t t h e term i t s e l f ) . A number of f u r t h e r o b s e r v a t i o n s
43
could b e added t o s u g g e s t t h e i m p o r t a n t impact of Whitney on S a u s s u r e .
A l t o g e t h e r t h e y confirm, a l o n g w i t h S a u s s u r e ' s f r e q u e n t r e f e r e n c e s t o
Whitney d u r i n g t h e l a s t two decades of h i s l i f e ( t h e e a r l i e r p e r i o d
cannot b e documented s u f f i c i e n t l y i n t h i s r e s p e c t ) , o u r c o n t e n t i o n t h a t
S a u s s u r e ' s p r i n c i p a l s o u r c e of i n s p i r a t i o n i s n o t t o b e found o u t s i d e
t h e s t u d y of language b u t i n t h e l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r i e s of h i s own time.
Whitney i s S a u s s u r e ' s f o r e r u n n e r par exceZZence; a s S a u s s u r e s t a t e d i n
1908, Whitney n e v e r s a i d a n y t h i n g r e g a r d i n g a sound methodology of l a n g u a g e
s t u d y which was n o t c o r r e c t , b u t , S a u s s u r e added, h e n e v e r came up w i t h a
s y s t e m a t i s a t i o n of h i s i d e a s ( c f . SM, 51): t o have done t h i s i s t h e m e r i t

tk
and g r e a t n e s s o f S a u s s u r e ' s g e n i u s .
 FOOTNOTES - 1.3.1

Kukenheim (1966: 1 1 0 ) , f o r example, s u g g e s t s t h e i n f l u e n c e of

K a r l V o s s l e r and Hugo Schuchardt on FdS; h e i s n o t even aware of t h e
f a c t t h a t t h e a u t h o r of L i f e and Growth o f Language (84) i s i d e n t i c a l
w i t h t h e writer of A Practical French Grammar (96) a s t h e i n d e x (280)
reveals.

S u b t i t l e d : Les idBes maitresses des sciences e t leurs rapports,

and now almost t w i c e a s l o n g a s t h e e d i t i o n of 1901 ( P a r i s : F. Alcan,
l92O), iii + 322 pp.

Sechehaye wrote: "A c e t t e Qpoque [ i . e . d u r i n g FdS's s t a y i n

L e i p z i g 1876178, 1879/80], un l i v r e a v a i t d6j; s a n s d o u t e e x e r c 6 une
profonde i n f l u e n c e s u r s a [ i . e . FdS ' s ] ~ e n s g ee t l ' a v a i t o r i e n t g e dans
une bonne d i r e c t i o n : nous voulons p a r l e r de l ' o u v r a g e du s a n s c r i t i s t e
a m g r i c a i n Whitney, La v i e du Zangage ( p u b l i 6 en 1875)" (RPhiZos 44:9
[1917]).

Language and the Study o f Language: meZve Lectures on the Prin-

c i p l e s of Linguistic Science (New York: S c r i b n e r , Armstrong & Co., 1 8 6 7 ) ,
x i + 505 pp. Subsequent e d i t i o n s a r e unchanged r e p r i n t s -
a procedure
a l r e a d y noted by J . J o l l y i n h i s p r e f a c e t o t h e G. t r a n s l . (1874:x),
except f o r a n "Analysis" added t o t h e 3 r d ed. of 1870 (pp. 475-90);
l a s t repr. i n 1902.

Die Sprachwissenschaft: W. D . Whitney's Vorlesungen iiber d i e

Principien der vergleichenden Sprachforschung [ n o t e t h e l a s t p a r t of
t h e G. t i t l e ! ] , adapted f o r t h e German p u b l i c by J u l i u s J o l l y (Munich:
Th. Ackermann, 1874), x x i x +
713; "Vorrede d e s B e a r b e i t e r s " , i i i - x v i i .

We e x c l u d e h e r e t h e two volumes of Oriental and Linguistic Studies

(New York: S c r i b n e r & Armstrong, 1873-74) which c o n s i s t of a c o l l e c t i o n
of p a p e r s w r i t t e n between 1853 and 1873 and c o n t a i n a r t i c l e s which were
d i r e c t e d a g a i n s t t h e t h e o r e t i c a l views of S t e i n t h a l and S c h l e i c h e r .
We s h a l l r e v e r t t o t h e s e i n chap. 1 . 3 . 2 .

The Life and Growth of Language: An Outline of Linguistic Science

(New York: D. Appleton; London: H . S. King, 1875), i x + 327; i n t h e
f o l l o w i n g y e a r s a number of r e - e d i t i o n s of t h i s volume appeared b o t h
i n America and England, t h e l a t e s t ed. b e i n g i n 1 9 0 1 . T h i s book s h o u l d
n o t b e confused w i t h t h e E . a d a p t i o n of Whitney's f i r s t book on t h i s
t o p i c e n t i t l e d Language and I t s Study, p r e p a r e d by Richard Morris (London:
Triibner, l 8 7 6 ) , x x i i + 317 p p . , which reproduces only t h e f i r s t s e v e n
l e c t u r e s of t h e o r i g i n a l . M o r r i s ' c u r i o u s i n t r o d u c t i o n ( v i - x x i i ) can b e
ignored.
 The o r i g i n a l (and t h e G. a d a p t i o n ) of La Vie du langage a p p e a r e d
i n t h e I n t e r n a t i o n a l S c i e n t i f i c L i b r a r y s e r i e s ( P a r i s : G. ~ a i l l i s r e ,
1 8 7 5 ) ; 3 r d ed., 1880, v i i i- 264. W e d o n o t b e l i e v e t h a t Whitney p r e -
p a r e d t h e F r . ed. h i m s e l f as Godel m a i n t a i n s (SM, 19; 1966: 4 7 9 ) , though
we a r e n o t s u r e w h e t h e r C a r l S . R. C o l l i n i s c o r r e c t i n a s c r i b i n g i t t o
M i c h e l ~ r 6 a l(who t r a n s l a t e d Bopp's Vergleichende G r m a t i k i n t o F r e n c h ,
1866-72) i n h i s Bibliographical Guide t o Sernatology (Lund: A. B. Ph.
L i n d s t e d t , 1915 [ 1 9 1 4 ] ) , p . 28.

Deutsche Rundschau ( B e r l i n ) 4: 259-79 (Aug. l 8 7 5 ) , e s p . 2 7 l f f .

lo Leben und Wachstum der Sprache ( ~ e i p z i g : F . A. Brockhaus, 1 8 7 6 ) ,
xv + 350 pp.

T h i s l a t t e r i n f o r m a t i o n h a s b e e n t a k e n from Whitney 's a u t o b i o g r a p h y ,

"William Dwight Whitney", Forty Years ' Record of the Class of 1845 WiZZiams
CoZZege, Nm Haven, ed. b y W . D. Whitney (New Haven, Conn.: P r i n t e d b y
T u t t l e , Morehouse & T a y l o r , 1 8 8 5 ) , 175-82; h e r e p. 179.

l2 The b i b l i o g r a p h i c a l o v e r v i e w of t h e y e a r s 1875-77 l i s t s and

comments upon t h e f o l l o w i n g o f W h i t n e y ' s w r i t i n g s : L i f e and Growth
of Language mentioned t o g e t h e r w i t h t h e F r . , G . , and I t . t r a n s l . (KZ
23:602), i . e . o n t h e f i r s t p a g e ; a n o f f p r i n t of h i s p a p e r " @ i ko r~ ~
OECTE, - N a t u r a l o r C o n v e n t i o n a l ? " which a p p e a r e d i n TAPA i n 1874; r e f e r -
/

e n c e s t o Whitney i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h p u b l i c a t i o n s b y Max M G l l e r and Rudolf

von Raumer (604) ; Language and I t s Study (605) ; t e x t b o o k s f o r t h e s t u d y
of S a n s k r i t ( 6 1 1 ) , a c r i t i c i s m o f Max Mcller which a p p e a r e d i n PAOS (1875176:
x x - x x i i i ) n o t e d on p. 612, and two f u r t h e r a r t i c l e s mentioned on t h e
s u b s e q u e n t page.

l3 S. Brugmann's commemorative a r t i c l e , "Zum G e d z c h t n i s W.D. Whitney 's",

JAOS 19: 74-81 ( l 8 9 7 ) , w r i t t e n i n 1894, e s p . 75, 78-80. We b e l i e v e we c a n
overcome G o d e l ' s d o u b t s t h a t "il n ' e s t p a s s u r q u e les l i v r e s d e Whitney
a i e n t f a i t g r a n d b r u i t 2 L e i p z i g " (SM, 3 3 ) , f o r t h e y c e r t a i n l y h a v e .

l4Sanskrit G r m a r : Including Both the Classical Language and the

other Dialects, of Veda and- BrEhmana ( L e i p z i g : B r e i t k o p f & H z r t e l , 1 8 7 9 ) ,
mriv +486 pp.; Indische Grammatik, wnfassend die klassische Sprache und
die Zlteren ~ i a l e k t e(= B i b l i o t h e k i d g . Grammatiken, 2) ( i b i d . ) , x x v i i i
+ 520 pp. I n 1885, a s u p p l e m e n t was p u b l i s h e d , t h e G . v e r s i o n of which
was. a l s o p r e p a r e d by H. Zimmer, a n d i n 1889 a r e v i s e d v e r s i o n of t h e
Sanskrit G r m a r a p p e a r e d , t h e t e n t h i s s u e o f which was p r i n t e d i n 1964
(Cambridge, Mass.: H a r v a r d Univ. P r e s s ; London: Oxford Univ. P r e s s ) .
S. a l s o A l f r e d H i l l e b r a n d t 's r e v i e w of t h i s book i n BB 5: 338-45 (1879) .
l5 Cf. "Ferdinand d e S a u s s u r e 2 1 ' E c o l e P r a t i q u e d e s H a u t e s ~ t u d e s " ,
AnnEPHE 1964165, 21-34; h e r e p. 33.

l6 Cf. t h e chap., "Le o r i g i n i d e l l a l i n g u i s t i c a g e n e r a l e : Whitney",

i n T e r r a c i n i , 1949:73-115, 117-21; e s p . 74, 8 3 , 87, 9 3 , 9 7 , 100-1, 104,
106, 108-9, 111; T e r r a c c i n i , however, i s m a i n l y concerned w i t h t r a c i n g
t h e v a r i o u s i n f l u e n c e s on Whitney, t h e main s o u r c e s of which h e s e e s
i n 1 9 t h c e n t u r y E n g l i s h philosophy and s o c i o l o g y , n o t a b l y t h e work of
H e r b e r t Spencer (1820-1903) .
l7 B o l e l l i a f f i r m s : "Inserando [ r e f e r r i n g t o h i s s e l e c t i o n from
La v i t a e Zo sviluppo deZ Zinguaggio, h e r e pp. 152-91 il l i n g u a g g i o
n e l l ' a m b i t o s t o r i c o , e g l i [ i . e . Whitney] pose anche il problema d e l
r a p p o r t 0 f r a i n d i v i d u o e comunits l i n g u i s t i c a , f r a f o r z a i n d i v i d u a l e
d ' i n n o v a z i o n e e f o r z a c o m u n i t a r i a d i conservazione. E p r o p r i o p e r q u e s t '
a s p e t t o s a r z sembrato p a r t i c u l a r m e n t e n o t e v o l e a F . d e S a u s s u r e , a 1
q u a l e fanno p e n s a r e anche a l t r i l a t i d e l l a d o t t r i n a d e l Whitney: 1'
a f f e r m a z i o n e , s i a p u r e i n nuce, d e l l a l i n g u a come s i s t e m a , l ' a f f a c i a r s i
d e l l e o p p o s i z i o n i morphologiche, il t e n t a t i v o , s i a p u r e non a n c o r e ,
d e l t u t t o r i u s c i t o p e r l o i m p l i c a z i o n i p i 2 concretamente n a t u r a l i s t i c h e
e p o s i t i v i s t i c h e , d i s t u d i a r e l a l i n g u a i n s 6 , come f a t t o autonomo"
(1965: 152) .
l8 On January 14, 1971, however, we r e c e i v e d , through t h e k i n d
o f f i c e s of D r . Rudolf Engler, a Xerox copy of h i s typed copy of FdS's
m s . , which h e i s engaged i n p r e p a r i n g f o r p u b l i c a t i o n . However, a key
t o t h e e x c e r p t s c a n b e found i n SM, 37 which r e f e r s t o "des e x t r a i t s
p u b l i g s en 1954". S i n c e t h e p u b l i s h e d e x c e r p t s a r e n o t always a c c u r a t e
and do n o t g i v e t h e page r e f e r e n c e s of t h e m s . , we s h a l l always q u o t e
from t h i s copy though we s h a l l r e f e r t o t h e p u b l i s h e d e x c e r p t s whenever
possible.

It i s t r u e , however, t h a t FdS who quoted from Whitney 's work

i n a l l t h r e e of h i s c o u r s e s on g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s ( s . SM, 32, n.31)
n o t e d s i m i l a r i d e a s elsewhere. Cf. t h e c o l l a t i o n of s t u d e n t s ' n o t e s
of t h e second c o u r s e on g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s (1908/09) p r e p a r e d by Godel
(CFS 15:6-103; h e r e p. 9 ) f o r a n e x p l i c i t r e f e r e n c e t o Whitney.

20 S i n c e Godel's d i s s e r t a t i o n does n o t p r o v i d e an index, t h e pages

on which h e r e f e r s t o Whitney a n d / o r h i s work w i l l b e l i s t e d i n t h e
f o l l o w i n g . Square b r a c k e t s i n d i c a t e t h a t a r e f e r e n c e h a s b e e n made t o
N 1 0 , t h e manuscript i n which FdS o u t l i n e d h i s a p p r e c i a t i o n and c r i t i c i s m
of Whitney, w i t h o u t naming Whitney a n d / o r h i s i d e a s about t h e n a t u r e of
>
language and l i n g u i s t i c s : [ 1 3 ] , 19, 31, no.28, [ 3 7 ] , 43, n.16, 43-6,
47, n.26, 51, 75, [114], 136, [ 1 4 2 ] , 143, 144, 147, 148, 152, 158, 164,
n.117, 182, n.173, [184, n.1791, 185, and nn.184-5, 186, and n.191,
190, 194, and nn.214-7, 195 and nn.219-20, [196, n.2241, 213, and n.279,
218-9, and no.303, 220, [222,n.313, 223, n.317, 226, 252, 255, 257, 260,
265, 266, 279, [ 2 8 l ] .

21 A t t h e b e g i n n i n g of h i s "Lexique d e l a t e r m i n o l o g i e [ s a u s s u r i e n n e ] " ,
SM, 252-81, Godel n o t e s t h a t " l ' h i s t o i r e a n t g r i e u r e e t s u r t o u t u l t g r i e u r e
d e s termes n ' a pas 6 t 6 systgmatiquement gtudige: on a c i t 6 s u r t o u t Whitney
e t , d ' a u t r e p a r t , l e s l i n g u i s t e s genevois, d i s c i p l e s d i r e c t s ou i n d i r e c t s
d e ~ a u s s u r e " (SM, 252). I
 22 Cf. h i s a r t i c l e , " S t r i c t u r e s on t h e Views of August S c h l e i c h e r
R e s p e c t i n g t h e Nature of ~ a n g u a i eand Kindred S u b j e c t s " , TAPA f o r 1871;
r e p r . Ln Whitney, Oriental and Linguistic Studies (New York: S c r i b n e r ,
Armstrong 6 Sons, l 8 7 3 ) , F i r s t S e r i e s , 298-331 (under t h e new t i t l e
of " S c h l e i c h e r and t h e P h y s i c a l Theory of Language"). The same v o l .
a l s o c o n t a i n s a paper e n t i t l e d " S t e i n t h a l and t h e P s y c h o l o g i c a l Theory of
Language", op. c i t . , 332-75. Whitney 's l i f e - t i m e c o n t r o v e r s y w i t h t h e
famous p o p u l a r i z e r of l i n g u i s t i c s t u d i e s , F r i e d r i c h Max Miiller (1823-
1900), i s w e l l known i n t h e h i s t o r y of l i n g u i s t i c s ( c f . Malmberg, 1964:
124; Lepschy, 1970: 74, b u t n o t n o t e d by ~ v i c ,1965 and Robins, 1967,
f o r example). Whitney's l a s t e x p r e s s i o n of disagreement w i t h M i i l l e r ' s
views i s h i s Max MiiZZer and the Science of Language (New York: D. Apple-
t o n , 1892), iii + 79 p p . , i n which M c l l e r 'Iwas a s s a i l e d w i t h somewhat
unbecoming a c e r b i t y by a n a u t h o r a l s o more d i s t i n g u i s h e d a s a S a n s k r i t i s t
t h a n a s a l i n g u i s t , W. D. Whitney", i f we a r e t o b e l i e v e t h e o p i n i o n
of L. H. Gray (l939:441-2). A very i n f o r m a t i v e a r t i c l e i s Whitney's
II S t r e i t f r a g e n d e r h e u t i g e n Sprachphilosophie" of 1875 ( c f . l o c a t i o n g i -
ven i n n.9 of t h i s c h a p t e r ) , i n which h e c h a s t i s e s erroneous i d e a s and
II
t h e o r i e s " of language p u t forward by Max Miiller, S c h l e i c h e r , and S t e i n t h a l .

23 I n t h i s a r t i c l e on Whitney FdS d i s c u s s e s a t some l e n g t h t h e

n e c e s s i t y of d i s t i n g u i s h i n g between t h e h i s t o r i c a l and t h e a n t i - h i s t o r i c a l
approach t o language (1894:9-33 [ p a s s i m ] ) ,b u t h e does n o t mention t h e
terms synchronic o r diachronic. However, t h e s e terms had a l r e a d y been
coined by FdS d u r i n g roughly t h e same p e r i o d ( c f . SM, 37) i n p r e s e r v e d
n o t e s which were d e s i g n a t e d f o r a book on g e n e r a l p r i n c i p l e s of language
s t u d y ( c f . CFS 21:95), e x t r a c t s of which have been p u b l i s h e d (CFS 12:
68-70) and analyzed (SM, 46-50).

24 It h a s b e e n h e l d by 1viE (1965: 125) t h a t FdS 's "enthusiasm f o r

a mathematical approach t o language i s q u i t e i n s u f f i c i e n t l y r e p r e s e n t e d ' '
i n t h e CLG; c f . a l s o Mounin, 1968: 26-8. I n p r i v a t e correspondence of
J a n u a r y 1 3 , 1971, P r o f . W. P. Lehmann s u g g e s t e d t h a t t h e r e might have
been some i n f l u e n c e from t h e Vergleichende Betrachtungen iiber neuere
geometrische Forschungen (Erlangen: D e i c h e r t , 1872) by t h e well-known
G S t t i n g e n p r o f e s s o r of mathematics F e l i x K l e i n (1849-1925) on FdS when
h e p r e p a r e d h i s Mzmoire. A v e r i f i c a t i o n of t h i s s u g g e s t i o n would go
beyond t h e scope of o u r i n q u i r y ; s u f f i c e i t t o n o t e t h a t a comparison
between a game of c h e s s and &bat de langue a s w e l l a s t h e term valeur
played a l r e a d y a t t h a t t i m e an i m p o r t a n t r 8 1 e i n FdS's argument ( c f .
1894:9-11, 15-6); S . CLG, 43, 125-7, 153-4, 185.

25 Godel (SM, 257) a p p e a r s t o h a v e overlooked t h e e n t r y p e r t a i n i n g

t o t h i s last-mentioned e x p r e s s i o n ( c f . LSL, 494), s i n c e h e r e f e r s t o
pp. 132, 134, 400, on which t h e word ' c o n v e n t i o n a l ' i s mentioned ( w i t h
no s p e c i f i c i n t e n t ) , b u t i g n o r e s t h e r e f e r e n c e s on pp. 1 4 , 32, 71, 128,
148, 409-10, 438. On t h e o t h e r hand, Godel g i v e s v a r i o u s r e f e r e n c e s
t o LGL whose s h o r t index (321-7) does n o t i n c l u d e t h e e x p r e s s i o n s ' a r b i -
t r a r y ' , ' c o n v e n t i o n a l ' , ' s i g n ' , ' s y s tem' , e t c . The French a d a p t i o n of
t h e l a t t e r , La v i e du Zangage, c o n t a i n s no i n d e x a t a l l .
 26 I n s p e a k i n g of s i g n s o r words Whitney r e f e r s t o t h e t r a d i t i o n a l
c l a s s i c o p p o s i t i o n of O & E ~ VS. @ & E ~ (LGL, 1 9 ) . He e x p l i c i t l y s t a t e d :
"There i s not i n a known language a s i n g l e item which can b e t r u l y claimed
t o e x i s t @ & E ~ , 'by n a t u r e ' ; each s t a n d s i n i t s a c c e p t e d u s e O ~ a e l ,
'by an a c t of a t t r i b u t i o n ' , ... ( i b i d . , 282). S. a l s o h i s p a p e r ,
11@ 'v a ~olr 0 6 - ~N a t u~r a l ~o r Conventional", TAPA f o r 1874, 95-116.

27 It i s t r u e t h a t Whitney employed t h e term ' s i g n ' a l s o i n t h e

s e n s e of morpheme, e . g . E. s d e s i g n a t i n g p l u r a l , e t c . He observed:
"Off [ s i c ] was changed t o a ( v i r t u a l ) s i g n of t h e g e n i t i v e c a s e , and
...
t o t o an i n f i n i t i v e s i g n , " (LGL, 1 3 8 ) . S i m i l a r l y , FdS employed
a t times t h e term ' s i g n ' i n t h e s e n s e of " s i g n i f i a n t " (SM, 246).

28 We t e n d t o b e l i e v e t h a t Whitney ' s s o c i o l o g i s m h a s i t s o r i g i n
i n t h e t h e o r i e s p u t forward by H e r b e r t Spencer (1820-1903) a s T e r r a c i n i
(1949 :120-1) s u g g e s t e d . However, S a u s s u r e ' s immediate s o u r c e of i n -
s p i r a t i o n (with r e g a r d t o t h e s o c i a l c h a r a c t e r of language) was Whitney
and h a r d l y anybody e l s e ; b u t s . a l s o 2.2.1.2 f o r a l a t e r i n f l u e n c e .

29 Langue i n t h e s e n s e of t h e language of a p e o p l e (= FdS's langue

2
s . LTS, 32) i s d e f i n e d by Whitney a s " t h e immense a g g r e g a t e of t h e
a r t i c u l a t e d s i g n s f o r thought a c c e p t e d by, and c u r r e n t among, a c e r t a i n
v a s t community which [ i n t h e c a s e of E n g l i s h ] we c a l l English-speaking p e o p l e
.... It i s t h e sum of t h e s e p a r a t e languages o t a l l members of t h i s
community. O r - s i n c e each one s a y s some t h i n g s , o r s a y s them i n one
way, n o t t o b e a c c e p t e d a s i n t h e h i g h e s t s e n s e E n g l i s h - i t i s t h e i r
average r a t h e r t h a n t h e i r sum; i t i s t h a t p a r t of t h e a g g r e g a t e which i s
s u p p o r t e d by t h e usage of t h e m a j o r i t y ; ... I' (LSL, 22).

30 Das allgerneine linguistische Alphabet: Grundsiitze der fib e r t m g u n g

frernder Schriftsysteme und bisher noch ungeschriebener Sprachen i n euro-
pzische Buchstaben ( B e r l i n : W. Hertz, 1855); r e p r . Wiesbaden: Szndig,
1970. (Whitney was a p u p i l of Lepsius a t B e r l i n i n 1850152). I t a p p e a r s
.
t h a t t h e 2nd r e v . ed., t r a n s l . i n t o E , was more i n f l u e n t i a l : Standard
Alphabet for Reducing Unwritten Languages ...
(London: W i l l i a m s &
Norgate, 1863), x v i i + 315 pp.

31 Cf. t h e index of t h e CLG (319-26) which does n o t l i s t ' t e r m e '

a s one of t h e temrini technici a s a g a i n s t SM, 279 which g i v e s a number
of l o c a t i o n s i n t h e Cours ( e . g . 121-2, 124, 137, 158, 159, 163, 170,
177). We committed t h e same e r r o r i n o u r r e c e n t review of LTS i n Language
47: 447-50 (1971), i n which we expressed o u r s u r p r i s e about t h e f a c t t h a t
t h e G. t r a n s l . of t h e CLG rendered ' t e r m e ' i n t h r e e d i f f e r e n t ways and
t h e Russ. v e r s i o n showed even f i v e t r a n s l a t i o n s ( c f . LTS, 5 7 ) .

32 W e mean f o r example Whitney 's r e j e c t i o n of t h e i d e a t h a t l i n -

g u i s t i c s i s a branch of psychology (LGL, 303-4; c f . CLG, 3 3 ) , and h i s
a p p a r e n t view t h a t p h o n e t i c s (FdS c a l l s i t "phonologie") i s an a u x i l i a r y
s c i e n c e t o l i n g u i s t i c s ( c f . FdS,
, 1894: 7; CLG, 2 1 ) .
 33 S i n c e Godel c o n t e n t s h i m s e l f w i t h n o t i n g t h a t t h e term ' i n t e r -
c o u r s e ' " e s t d ' a i l l e u r s dans ~ i t t r 6 "(SM, 78, n.83) t h e f u l l q u o t a t i o n
and l o c a t i o n s h a l l b e given h e r e . ~ i t t r gg i v e s t h e f o l l o w i n g etymology
of t h e word: "Anglais, i n t e r c o u r s e , d e i n t e r (voy. e n t r e ) , e t c o u r s e .
Le mot a n g l a i s a 6 t 6 f a i t , comme on v o i t , s u r l e f r a n c a i s e n t r e e o u r s
q u i a p g r i dans n o t r e langue e t que nous reprenons dans c e l l e d e s Anglais"
( D i c t i o n n a i r e d e Za Zangue f r a n e a i s e , v o l . 2 [ P a r i s : H a c h e t t e , 18631,
p. 1 2 9 ) .

34 Cf. Whitney's o b s e r v a t i o n : "The i d i o s y n c r a s i e s , t h e s h a r p a n g l e s

and j u t t i n g c o r n e r s , of every man's idiom must b e worn o f f by a t t r i t i o n
a g a i n s t t h o s e w i t h which i t comes i n c o n t a c t i n t h e o r d i n a r y i n t e r c o u r s e
of l i f e , t h a t t h e common tongue may become a rounded u n i t " . (LSL, 156) .

35 FdS s t a t e s : < Come il n ' y a pour l e langage aucune comparaison

"
j u s t e , n i mGme grossi&ement j u s t e (. .
.), il e s t 6 v i d e n t qu'on p o u r r a
r e l e v e r dans c e l l e - c i , e n t r e a u t r e , c e d 6 f a u t f r a p p a n t que l a va2eu.r
d e s p i s c e s aux gchecs r e p o s e uniquement s u r l e u r u t i l i t 6 e t l e u r s o r t
p r o b a b l e dans Za s u i t e , ... " (p. 10a; i t a l i c s i n t h e o r i g i n a l ) .
36 There Whitney a s s e r t s : "To (2) conserve en g&&al, en a n g l a i s ,
s o n a n c i e n n e s i g n i f i c a t i o n d'approche; mais, comme s i g n e d e l ' i n f i n i t i f
t o e s t purement formel comme of; dans t o have, p a r exemple, il n ' e s t
qu'une e s p & e de s u b s t i t u t moderne pour l a v i e i l l e t e r m i n a i s o n a n d e
haban. Nous avons c o m p l ~ t e m e n tperdu l e s o u v e n i r de s a v a l e u r r g e l l e ,
e n t a n t que p r g p o s i t i o n governant un nom v e r b a l . "

37 On one o c c a s i o n h e observed t h a t i t would b e erroneous t o b e l i e v e

t h a t , i n a v o c a l i c a l t e r n a t i o n , "a e s t une $ t a p e e n t r e a e t z 6 r o . "
2
(Mgmoire sur Ze syst2me p r i m i t i f d e s voyeZZes dans Zes Zangues indo-
europgennes; r e p r . Hildesheim: G . O l m s , 1968, p . 217). And speaking of
a n Indo-European paradigm, h e n o t e d t h a t " l e s d g s i n e n c e s s o n t -s, -i
e t z 6 r o f f (p. 1 9 4 ) .
38
E. g. ' a r b i t r a i r e ' (SM, 255), ' a r t i c u l u s ' ( i b i d . ), ' c o n v e n t i o n n e l '
( 2 5 7 ) , ' e n t i t g ' (260; w i t h r e f . t o LSL, 54, 56, 65, 390 where Whitney
employed t h e t e r m " e n t i t y " ) , ' i n t e r c o u r s e ' (265, although no r e f . t o
t h e term i n Whitney i s g i v e n ) , ' l a n g u e ' (266, b o t h i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s ) ,
' s y s t s m e ' (279) .
39 Cf . a l s o Whitney 's p a p e r , "On M a t e r i a l and Form i n Language",
TAPA 2: 77-96 (1872) .
40 We r e p r o d u c e t h e F r . r e n d e r i n g of t h i s passage i n f o o t n o t e b e c a u s e
i t e x h i b i t s a f a r more r i g o r o u s p i c t u r e of t h e t h e o r e t i c a l i m p l i c a t i o n s
t h a n t h e o r i g i n a l , b o t h i n a c t u a l f o r m u l a t i o n and terminology:
II
Nous avons d 6 j 2 f a i t p l u s d ' u n e f o i s l a d i s t i n c t i o n e n t r e l e s 616ments
m a t g r i e l s e t l e s 616ments formels du l a n g a g e . L's de brooks ( r u i s s e a u x ) ,
p a r exemple, e s t formel dans son r a p p o r t avec brook ( r u i s s e a u ) , q u i e s t
m a t g r i e l ; l a l e t t r e a j o u t 6 e i n d i q u e quelque chose de subordonn6, une
m o d i f i c a t i o n du concept d e brook, l ' e x i s t e n c e d e l a mcme chose dans
p l u s i e u r s i n d i v i d u s ; en un mot, il f a i t un p l u r i e l d'un s i n g u l i e r .
Men ( h o m e s ) a l a mgme v a l e u r [ ! I p a r r a p p o r t 2 man (home); l e moyen
de f a i r e l a mzme d i s t i n c t i o n d i k f s r e seulement, l e s i g n e e s t i n t e r c a l g
a u l i e u d ' z t r e ajout;. Brooks and men n e s o n t pas d e p u r s m a t z r i a u x ;
i l s s o n t d e s m a t g r i a u x faconn&, d e s s i g n e s d e c o n c e p t i o n s s i m p l e s aux-
q u e l s est j o i n t un c a r a c t 2 r e i m p o r t a n t , l e nombre. Cependant, l ' o p p o s i -
t i o n avec brooks e t men, s u f f i t 2 r e n d r e brook e t man d e s mots f o r m e l s
a u s s i . Chacun c o n t i e n t , non p a r l a p r g s e n c e d ' u n s i g n e mais p a r 1'
a b s e n c e d'un s i g n e , l ' a f f i r m a t i o n du s i n g u l i e r " (La V i e du Zangage,
175-6). Note, f o r i n s t a n c e , t h e u s e of "opposition" i n t h e F r . t r a n s l .
where t h e E. o r i g i n a l shows " c o n t r a s t " , o r t h e word "pr&ence" ( t o b e
c o n t r a s t e d w i t h "absence") which i s n o t c o n t a i n e d i n t h e o r i g i n a l o r t h e
r e f o r m u l a t i o n of t h e concluding s e n t e n c e which shows more p r e c i s i o n
and f o r m a l i t y of s t a t e m e n t . T h i s may a l s o u n d e r s c o r e our b e l i e f t h a t
Whitney d i d n o t p r e p a r e t h e F r . t r a n s l . h i m s e l f , b u t t h a t a p o s s i b l y
more t h e o r e t i c a l l y i n c l i n e d l i n g u i s t executed t h i s job. (Interestingly,
t h e subsequent sentence i n t h e o r i g i n a l t e x t contains t h e expression
" s i g n i f i e d " , which, however, was n o t t r a n s l a t e d i n t o s i g n i f i z a s one
might h a v e e x p e c t e d ) .

41 Two s t u d e n t s n o t e d t h a t i t i s s u f f i c i e n t t o have a c o n t r a s t be-

tween x and z e r o ; c f . CLG(E) , 192. S. a l s o CLG, 1 9 1 f o r a n o t h e r example,
t h i s t i m e from t h e domain of s y n t a x . FdS a p p e a r s t o h a v e used t h e t e r m
z e r o q u i t e f r e q u e n t l y i n h i s l e c t u r e s , more o f t e n t h a n t h e i n d e x of t h e
CLG s u g g e s t s : pp. 71, 123, 124, [ n o t 163, a s i n d i c a t e d on p . 3251, b u t
pp. 249, 254, 256, 257, 302.
42
G. Devoto r e f e r s t o LSL, 1 5 4 f f . t o s u p p o r t h i s views: "Questa
b a s i d i p a r t e n z a n a s c e da una d i s t i n z i o n e fondamentale, i n t u i t a s i n d a
tempi l o n t a n i , f o r m u l a t a sommariamente d e l l a Whitney, e m o d i f i c a t a i n
mod0 r i g o r o s o du Ferdinand d e S a u s s u r e a t t r a v e r s o l a o p p o s i z i o n e d e l l a
.
Zangue ( c o l l e t t i v a ) e d e l l a p a r o l e ( i n d i v i d u a l e ) " This does n o t , of
c o u r s e , p r e c l u d e t h e p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t FdS found s u b s t a n t i a l s u p p o r t f o r
h i s dichotomy i n Whitney. The F r . t r a n s l . of LGL speaks of "appren-
t i s s a g e d e l a p a r o l e ' ' (Vie, l 6 ) , I t l a n g u e m a t e r n e l l e " ( 1 7 ) , and u s e s t h e
t h r e e r e l e v a n t e x p r e s s i o n s i n a s h o r t paragraph a s f o l l o w s : "I1 y a ,
... , dans l t a c q u i s i t i o n du langage, un 616ment d e n g c e s s i t g . Q u e l l e
que s o i t l a l a n g u e que l'homme s l a p p r o p r i e e l l e d e v i e n t son mode n g c e s s a i r e
de ~ e n s g e ,a u s s i b i e n que d e p a r o l e ' ' ( 1 8 ) . There i s , however, no i n d i -
c a t i o n t h a t Whitney ( a n d / o r t h e t r a n s l a t o r ) used t h e terms c o n s i s t e n t l y
( c f . Vie, 18-9, 21, 24-5, 27, and e l s e w h e r e ) .

43 We cannot f i n d s u f f i c i e n t e v i d e n c e , however, t o prove w h e t h e r

Whitney i n f l u e n c e d FdS concerning t h e dichotomy of synchrony v s . d i a -
chrony. I n t e r e s t i n g l y , Brugmann n o t e d i n 1894 i n h i s account of Whitney's
work ( i n p a r t i c u l a r r e f e r r i n g t o h i s work a s a S a n s k r i t i s t ) : " A l s San-
s k r i t i s t h a t s i c h Whitney von dem Boden d e r s t a t i s t i s c h e n [N.B. = Brug-
mann's term f o r " s t a t i s c h " , EFK] und d e s c r i p t i v e n Sprachbehandlung kaum
je e n t f e r n t , und s o h a t e r s e l b e r h i e r d i e p r a k t i s c h e n Folgerungen s e i n e r
allgemeinen Lehren iiber Spra chentwicklung n i c h t gezogen" (JAOS 19 :80) .
A l f r e d H i l l e b r a n d t (1853-1927) made a s i m i l a r , s t i l l more i n t e r e s t i n g
remark i n h i s review of Whitney ' S Sanscrit Grammar ( L e i p z i g , l 8 7 9 ) ,
BB 5: 338-45 (l88O), when h e c h a r a c t e r i z e d t h e work n o t o n l y a s a "Mark-
.
s t e i n i n d e r G e s c h i c h t e d e r a l t i n d i s c h e n Gramrnatik" ( c f Georg BGhler ' s
[1837-981 q u i t e s i m i l a r p r a i s e i n JAOS 19:81 [ 1 8 9 7 ] ) , b u t a l s o a s a n
approach devoted t o t h e "Erforschung e i n e s Sprachzustandes" (338; c f .
De Mauro, 1968: 300) . This would i n v i t e an a d d i t i o n a l s t u d y of Whitney ' s
w r i t i n g s on S a n s k r i t w i t h which FdS was f a m i l i a r . S . a l s o James D.
McCawley's i n t e r e s t i n g p a p e r , "The P h o n o l o g i c a l Theory Behind Whitney 's
Sanskrit Grammar", Languages and Areas : Studies Presented t o George V .
Bobrinskoy (Chicago: Dept. of L i n g u i s t i c s , Univ. of Chicago, 1 9 6 7 ) ,
77-85.
1.3.2 Neograrnmarian Tenets concerning t h e P r i n c i p l e s of Language
I

Study ( w i t h s p e c i a l r e f e r e n c e t o P a u l and S i e v e r s )

[ I t i s ] the l a t t e r part of the nineteenth cen-

tury, a period i n which the history of Zinguis-
t i c s has hitherto been illwninated by intense
b u t narrow beams, and now urgently needs bring-
ing t o the general l i g h t of day.

Barbara H. M. S t r a n g i n 1970 (FL 6:438)

1.3.2.1 The Position of the Neogrammarians in Contemporary Histories

of Linguistics

meben der r e i n historischen Deutuag der Sprach-

gegebenheiten wurde die physische und psychische
S e i t e der Sprache niemals ganz aus dem Auge
gelassen. Fiir jene schrieb E. Sievers seine
'Grundziige der Phonetik ...
', fiir diese Her-
mann Paul seine 'Prinzipien der Sprachgeschichte'.
Beide sibher haben, u i e schon d i e mehrfachen
AufZagen xeigen, fib i h r e Zeit eine grosse
Bedeutung erlangt und haben die Forschung i n
i h r e r Weise massgebend b e e i n f l u s s t .
Franz Specht (1948: 243)

S t r u c t u r a l l i n g u i s t i c s h a s a l m o s t completely superseded h i s t o r i c a l
work i n t h e d e s c r i p t i o n and comparison of languages d u r i n g t h e p a s t two
decades. Subsequently t h e i n t e r e s t i n t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n s of t h e neogrammarians
h a s become m a r g i n a l and, r e g r e t t a b l y , t h e p i c t u r e of t h e i r work h a s become
more and more d i s t o r t e d s i n c e i t a p p e a r s t h a t many l i n g u i s t s b a s e t h e i r
judgements on secondary and t e r t i a r y s o u r c e s , t h e s o - c a l l e d h i s t o r i e s of
l i n g u i s t i c s , i n s t e a d of b o t h e r i n g themselves w i t h r e a d i n g t h e o r i g i n a l
texts. Thus t h e neogrammarians have become t h e s c a p e g o a t s f o r a l l a p p a r e n t
v i c e s of h i s t o r i c a l l i n g u i s t i c s , and i t h a s b e c o m e a n h a b i t u a l a t t i t u d e t o
a c c u s e them of t h e i r "atomism" i n t h e t r e a t m e n t of l i n g u i s t i c phenomena
 ( c f . H e l b i g , 1970:17, and f o r a more c a u t i o u s judgement, Lepschy, 1970:
34). To s u g g e s t t h a t t h e s e a c c u s a t i o n s a r e n o t n e c e s s a r i l y t r u e and,
i n a d d i t i o n , t o claim t h a t S a u s s u r e , t h e f a t h e r of s t r u c t u r a l l i n g u i s -
t i c s , was markedly i n f l u e n c e d by some of t h e i r p r i n c i p l e s of language
d e s c r i p t i o n may a p p e a r , f o r t h a t r e a s o n , almost blasphemous, s i n c e i t i s
g e n e r a l l y h e l d t h a t S a u s s u r e u s u a l l y developed h i s i d e a s by opposing neo-
grammarian views ( c f . Malmberg, 1964: 39; Leroy, 1971: 6 9 ) . It seems t h e r e -
f o r e n e c e s s a r y t o o u t l i n e e s s e n t i a l t e n e t s of t h e neogrammarian d o c t r i n e
b e f o r e approaching t h e q u e s t i o n of how t h e y r e l a t e t o S a u s s u r e ' s l i n g u i s -
t i c theories.
I n t h e p r e c e d i n g c h a p t e r we have g i v e n what we b e l i e v e t o b e s u f f i -
c i e n t e v i d e n c e f o r o u r c l a i m t h a t Whitney a n d h i s w o r k , b o t h i n t h e a r e a
of S a n s k r i t s t u d i e s and g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s , were w e l l known i n L e i p z i g
and o t h e r c e n t r e s of h i s t o r i c a l and comparative l i n g u i s t i c r e s e a r c h , f o r
i n s t a n c e i n B e r l i n and GEttingen, t o name o n l y two o t h e r i m p o r t a n t ' s c h o o l s '
i n t h e s e v e n t i e s of t h e 19 t h c e n t u r y . One may r e f e r , once a g a i n , t o Brug-
mann's commemorative a r t i c l e i n 1894 i n which h e acknowledges t h e d e b t
owed by h i m s e l f a s w e l l a s t h e d e b t of o t h e r contemporary l i n g u i s t s t o
Whitney who was regarded a s an a u t h o r i t y and a g u i d e d u r i n g t h e e a r l y
p e r i o d of t h e neogrammarian movement.' It s h o u l d b e noted t h a t Brugmann
emphasized i n t h i s a r t i c l e t h e importance of Whitney w i t h r e g a r d t o "Prin-
z i p i e n f r a g e n d e r Sprachgeschichte" and saw r e a s o n t o e x p a t i a t e on t h i s m a t t e r
b e c a u s e h e b e l i e v e d t h a t a number of h i s contemporaries would deny t h e
impact of Whitney's t h e o r e t i c a l works ( " s p r a c h t h e o r e t i s c h e Werke") on Indo-
European l i n g u i s t i c s t u d i e s (JAOS 19:76-7). Brugmann c r i t i c i z e d contem-
p o r a r y i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s of Humboldtian i d e a s , a l t h o u g h h e conceded t h e
v a l u e of some of S t e i n t h a l ' s f i n d i n g s , and s t r e s s e d t h e f a r more m a t t e r -
o f - f a c t s t a t e m e n t s found i n Whitney concerning t h e n a t u r e of h i s t o r i c a l
l i n g u i s t i c s ("Wesen d e r Sprachgeschichte") . A l o n g e r p a s s a g e may b e quoted
i n which Brugmann o u t l i n e s h i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g of Whitney's c o n t r i b u t i o n s
t o g e n e r a l a s p e c t s of language s t u d y , s i n c e i t r e v e a l s t o some e x t e n t
t h e views h e l d n o t o n l y by Brugmann h i m s e l f b u t a p p a r e n t l y a l s o by most of
h i s colleagues a t Leipzig. Brugmann s t a t e s t h a t t h e most i m p o r t a n t of
Whitney's d o c t r i n e s were t h e f o l l o w i n g :
 I f one a t t r i b u t e s t o language a n e x i s t e n c e of i t s own, c e r t a i n
a c t i v i t i e s , c e r t a i n i n c l i n a t i o n s o r moods, a c a p a c i t y f o r
accommodating i t s e l f t o t h e needs of man and s i m i l a r q u a l i f i -
c a t i o n s , t h e s e can o n l y b e regarded a s f i g u r a t i v e e x p r e s s i o n s .
They do n o t d e n o t e t h e s u b j e c t - m a t t e r i t s e l f , and nobody s h o u l d
b e deluded by them. I n r e a l i t y language e x i s t s o n l y i n t h e
minds and on t h e l i p s of t h o s e who s p e a k i t . A l l changes i n
t h e development of language s e r v e t o meet t h e n e c e s s i t i e s of
t h e human mind. However, a c o n s c i o u s i n t e n t h a r d l y e v e r governs
[ s u c h changes], and t h e r e f o r e language i s n o t an a r t i f i c i a l
p r o d u c t . I t i s n o t a n a t u r a l p r o d u c t e i t h e r . S i n c e every-
t h i n g which c o n s t i t u t e s t h e language of a n a t i o n o r i g i n a t e s
i n mental a c t i v i t y and i s based on a long c h a i n of p r e c e d i n g
p r o c e s s e s i n which t h e human mind i t s e l f , i n f l u e n c e d a s i t
may b e by e x t e r n a l f a c t o r s , h a s always been t h e t r u e moving
f o r c e , language i s n o t h i n g b u t a human i n s t i t u t i o n . And
t h e r e f o r e l i n g u i s t i c s c i e n c e i s a n h i s t o r i c a l o r moral s c i e n c e
. .. (JAOS 19:78-9; my t r a n s l a t i o n ) .
2

When Brugmann c o n t i n u e s t h a t o n l y a s u p e r f i c i a l view of language c o u l d

have c a l l e d l i n g u i s t i c s a d i s c i p l i n e which belongs t o t h e n a t u r a l s c i e n c e s ,
h e i n d c a t e s a t l e a s t i n d i r e c t l y how i m p o r t a n t Whitney's a f f i r m a t i o n s
a b o u t t h e n a t u r e of language had been t o him and t h e ~ u n g g r a m m a t i k e ri n
t h e 70s and 80s i n t h e i r f i g h t a g a i n s t erroneous views c o n c e r n i n g language
and i t s s t u d y p u t forward by S c h l e i c h e r , Max Miiller, and o t h e r s ( c f . Brug-
mann and O s t h o f f ' s c r i t i c i s m of 1878 i n Lehmann, 1967:198-209 [passim]).
I n a d d i t i o n Whitney's s t a t e m e n t s concerning t h e mechanisms of l i n g u i s t i c
change, a c c o r d i n g t o which i n d i v i d u a l m o d i f i c a t i o n s proceed g r a d u a l l y and
very slowly and w i t h o u t t h e s p e a k e r ' s n o t i c e , a r e summed up i n t h e f o l l o w i n g
manner: I n d i v i d u a l changes "cannot succeed i f t h e y d e v i a t e t o o s t r o n g l y
from t h e e x i s t i n g usage ["Sprachgebrauch"]; o n l y t h o s e which recommend
themselves t o t h e l i n g u i s t i c i n s t i n c t of everybody ["dem Sprachgefiihl A l l e r " ]
c a n b e s u c c e s s f u l a n d r e c e i v e g e n e r a l a c c e p t a n c e . 1'3 Brugmann's concluding
a f f i r m a t i o n t h a t t h e s e i d e a s of Whitney's l a i d t h e f o u n d a t i o n f o r a n a d e q u a t e
treatmentso t h e "sprachgeschichtliche Prinzipienlehre" e x h i b i t s c l e a r l y
t h e neogrammarian p r e d i l e c t i o n f o r a n h i s t o r i c a l approach t o l i n g u i s t i c
a n a l y s i s and, a t t h e same time, t h e d i f f e r e n c e between t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n
of Whitney by members of t h e "Leipzig School" and i t s temporary a s s o c i a t e
F. d e S a u s s u r e . I n f a c t Brugmann uses t h e e x p r e s s i o n ' h i s t o r i c a l ' v e r y
f r e q u e n t l y i n t h i s a r t i c l e of about h a l f a dozen pages and even goes s o
f a r as t o a c c u s e Whitney o f h a v i n g p r a c t i s e d a p r e d o m i n a n t l y s t a t i c and
4
d e s c r i p t i v e approach t h u s f a i l i n g t o follow h i s g e n e r a l p r i n c i p l e s !
D e s p i t e h i s c l a i m t h a t h e was much i n t e r e s t e d i n g e n e r a l q u e s t i o n s
of l i n g u i s t i c s (JAOS 19:76) Brugmann d i d l i t t l e t o c o n t r i b u t e t o t h i s
a s p e c t of l i n g u i s t i c a c t i v i t y d u r i n g t h e 1 9 t h c e n t u r y , and i t was o n l y
a f t e r c o m p l e t i o n of t h e second e d i t i o n of t h e G r u n d r i s s i n 1916 t h a t h e
w r o t e on g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c theme^.^ I t i s t r u e t h a t Brugmann's " N a s a l i s
s o n a n s " marked a n i m p o r t a n t s t e p i n t h e h i s t o r y of Indo-European l i n g u i s t i c s
i n 1876, a y e a r i n which f a r more i m p o r t a n t p u b l i c a t i o n s a p p e a r e d t h a n
6
h i s t o r i a n s o f l i n g u i s t i c s a p p e a r t o b e aware o f , b u t t h e s y n t h e s i z e r
of t h e i d e a s and p r i n c i p l e s a d v o c a t e d by t h e J u n g g r m a t i k e r was t h e German-
i s t Hermann P a u l (1846-1921) whose P r i n c i p i e n d e r S p r a c h g e s c h i c h t e was
f i r s t p u b l i s h e d i n 1880 and r a n t h r o u g h f i v e e d i t i o n s d u r i n g t h e a u t h o r ' s
-
lifetime,' and which was soon r e g a r d e d as " t h e b i b l e o f t h e junggrammatiker
s c h o o l " (Malmberg, 1964: 1 2 ) .
 FOOTNOTES - 1.3.2.1

Cf. t h e f o l l o w i n g of Brugmann's acknowledgements: "War doch i n

jenen J a h r e n , da man i m M u t t e r l a n d e d e r I n d o g e r m a n i s t i k [ i . e . Germany]
auf e i n e griindliche R e v i s i o n d e r Forschungsmethode und auf d i e H e r s t e l l u n g
e i n e r angemessenen Wechselwirkung zwischen S p r a c h p h i l o s o p h i e und S p e c i a l -
forschung [ ! ] drang, m i r w i e anderen j c n g e r e n G e l e h r t e n Whitney i m S t r e i t
d e r Meinungen e i n Wegweiser, d e s s e n Z u v e r l z s s i g k e i t a u s s e r F r a g e s t a n d
und d e s s e n Winken man s t e t s m i t reichem Nutzen f o l g t e , ... I' (JAOS 19:
74-5 [1897]; c f . a l s o pp. 80-1).

I n t h e o r i g i n a l t e x t Brugmann adds Whitney's terms f o r "mensch-

l i c h e E i n r i c h t u n g " and " e i n e h i s t o r i s c h e oder G e i s t e s w i s s e n s c h a f t " i n
brackets.

JAOS 19 :79 ; Brugmann a p p e a r s t o f o r e s t a l l t h e modern emphasis on

and t h e c u r r e n t i n t e r e s t i n l i n g u i s t i c u n i v e r s a l s when h e s t a t e s i n t h e
subsequent s e n t e n c e : "Bei noch s o g r o s s e r V e r s c h i e d e n h e i t a b e r d e r :us-
s e r e n V e r h z l t n i s s e beruhen d i e Verznderungen d e r Sprachen a l l e n t h a l b e n
auf den g l e i c h e n Gesetzen und d e r g l e i c h e n A r t i h r e r Wirksamkeit". ( B i d .)
We emphasize t h i s t e r m i n o l o g i c a l usage b e c a u s e P a u l makes f r e q u e n t u s e of
t h e s e terms i n h i s Prinzipien.

B i d . , 80; Brugmann s p e a k s i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h Whitney of "Prin-

z i p i e n d e r Sprachgeschichte", (Zoc. c i t . , 76), " g e s c h i c h t l i c h e [ ] P r i n -
z i p i e n l e h r e " , and "wenn man s i c h d i e Sprache immer a l s etwas i n d e r Ges-
c h i c h t e s i c h entwickelndes ...
v o r s t e l l t " ( 7 9 ) , "Lehren Gber Sprachent-
wicklung" ( 8 0 ) .

.
C f h i s e s s a y , Der Ursprung des Scheinsub jekts ' e s ' i n den germani -
schen und romanischen Sprachen (Leipzig: B. G. Teubner, 1917), 57 pp.,
h i s s t u d y , ijber d i e Verschiedenheit der Sat zgestaZtung nach Massgabe
der seeZischen Grundfunktion i n den indogemanisehen Sprachen ( B i d . ,
1918), and h i s posthumous monograph, Die Syntax des einfachen Satzes i m
Indogermanisehen, ed. by Wilhelm S t r e i t b e r g [1964-19251 ( B e r l i n & L e i p z i g :
W. d e G r u y t e r , l 9 2 5 ) , v i i +229 pp. which show Brugmann's i n c r e a s i n g i n -
t e r e s t i n s y n t a x and t h e o r e t i c a l problems of language s t u d y .
6
Brugmann , "Nasalis s onans i n d e r indogermanis chen ~ r u n d s p r a c h e , "
C w t i u s Studien 9:287-338; K a r l Verner, "Eine Ausnahme d e r e r s t e n Laut-
verschiebung", KZ 23:9 7-130; August Leskien, Die Declination i r n SZaviseh-
Litauischen und Germanisehen (Leipzig: S . H i r z e l ) , x x i x 158; Hermann +
Osthof f , "Zur F r a g e des Ursprungs d e r germanischen N - ~ e c l i n a t i o n " , PBB
3:l-89; J o s t W i n t e l e r , Die Kerenzer Mundart des Kantons GZarus i n ihren
GrundzGgen dargesteZZt ( L e i p z i g & Heidelberg: C . W i n t e r ) , x i i + 240 pp. ;
Eduard S i e v e r s , ~ r u n d z z ~der
e LautphysioZogie zur ~ i n f i i h r m ni ~n das Studium
der LautZehre der indogermanisehen Sprachen ( L e i p z i g : B r e i t k o p f & ~ z r t e l ) ,
x + 150 pp.; F r i e d r i c h B e c h t e l , i%er gegenseitige AssimiZation der beiden
ZitterZaute i n den 2Ztesten Phasen des Indogermanisehen: Eine sprachges-
chichtziehe Untersuchung (GEttingen: Peppmiiller) , 68 pp. ; Karl Gustaf
.
Andresen, &er deutsehe VoZksetymoZogie ( H e i l b r o n n : Gebr H e n n i n g e r ) ,
v i i + 1 4 6 pp.; C a r o l i n e M i c h a e l i s , Romanische WortschZpfung ( L e i p z i g :
F . A. B r o c k h a u s ) , v i i i + 300 pp. F o r f u r t h e r p u b l i c a t i o n s of t h e y e a r
1876 see E.F.K. K o e r n e r , BibZiographia Saussmeana, 1870-1970, P a r t 11,
S e c t i o n 2.

H a l l e : Niemeyer, v i i + 288 pp. ; 2nd r e v . and much e n l . e d . , 1886,

x i + 368 p p . ; 3 r d e d . , 1898, x i + 396 pp.; 4 t h r e v . e d . , 1909, xv f 428
pp.; 5 t h e d . , 1920, xxv + 428 pp. = 8 t h ed. (Tiibingen: Niemeyer, 1968;
r e p r . 1970). P r i o r t o 1880 P a u l w r o t e a number o f i m ~ o r t a n ts t u d i e s on
Germanic phonology and morphology which a p p e a r e d i n t h e Beitrzge z u r Ges-
chichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur ( H a l l e : Niemeyer, 1 8 7 4 f f . ) ,
ed. b y P a u l t o g e t h e r w i t h Wilhelm Braune (1850-1926), v o l s . I - V I .
On P a u l , see Wilhelm S t r e i t b e r g ' s o b i t u a r y i n IJb 9:280-5; r e p r . i n
Portraits of Linguists I , 549-54.
1.3.2.2 Hermann P a u l and H i s P r i n c i p l e s of Language Study
I

I t has been forgotten t h a t Paul's Prin-

c i p i e n der Sprachgeschichte contains
some excellent observations which d i r e c t l y
h i n t a t m n y innovations which were t o
come a f t e r h i s time. He i s mainly r e -
membered as a t i r e l e s s aspostZe of h i s -
toricism. "

Milka I v i c (1965: 61)

It i s worth n o t i n g t h a t t h e o b s e r v a t i o n s Brugmann made i n h i s a r t i c l e

on Whitney mentioned above ( c f . 1.3.2.1) concerning g e n e r a l methodology
C 1 ~ r i n z i p i e n l e h r e " )and h i s t o r i c a l l i n g u i s t i c s ("Sprachgeschichte") are
much t h e same a s t h o s e p u t forward i n P a u l ' s Prinzipien, n o t a b l y i n t h e
second (1886) and subsequent e d i t i o n s , i n which h e r e p l i e d t o c r i t i c i s m s
made of h i s book from v a r i o u s s i d e s , i n p a r t i c u l a r by Ludwig T o b l e r (1827-95)
and Franz M i s t e l i (1841-1903) .'
A s e a r l y a s 1863 S c h l e i c h e r had claimed
2
t h a t we do n o t know a t h i n g i f we c a n n o t t e l l how i t h a s evolved, and,
acknowledged o r n o t , t h i s view became one of t h e prime c o n v i c t i o n s of t h e
neogrammarian d o c t r i n e , a c c o r d i n g t o which h i s t o r i c a l l i n g u i s t i c s was t h e
s o l e s c i e n t i f i c kind of language s t u d y . I n f a c t P a u l made h i s famous ex-
p l i c i t s t a t e m e n t t o t h i s e f f e c t i n t h e second e d i t i o n of h i s i n f l u e n t i a l
book a f t e r M i s t e l i had c o n t e s t e d t h i s view a l r e a d y i n h e r e n t i n t h e Prinzipien
of 1 8 8 0 . ~ It h a s become a r a t h e r u n f o r t u n a t e a t t i t u d e among h i s t o r i a n s
of l i n g u i s t i c s (which i n most c a s e s c a n probably b e t r a c e d back t o Peder-
s e n ' s account of 1 9 t h c e n t u r y l i n g u i s t i c s ) t o i g n o r e P a u l almost completely
( e . g. Specht, 1948: Dinneen, 1967; Lehmann, 1967; T a g l i a v i n i , 1968; Put-
schke, 1969; Lepschy, 1970) o r t o c i t e j u s t t h i s (now i l l - ) famed p a s s a g e
(cf . Malmberg, 1964: 14-5; T a g l i a v i n i , 1965: 304; Mounin, 1967: 210; Robins,
1967: 185) b u t i g n o r e t h e r e s t of P a u l ' s t e a c h i n g . Some noteworthy excep-
t i o n s a r e 1vi6 (1965:60-3), Arens (1969:346-59), Helbig (1970:15-9), and
p a r t i c u l a r l y t h e r e c e n t account which U r i e l Weinreich (19 26-67) gave d u r i n g
4
t h e l a s t months of h i s l i f e .
 Weinreich, i t i s t r u e , i s concerned w i t h P a u l ' s t h e o r y of language
change which cannot b e our main cbncern s i n c e we a r e n o t s o much i n t e r e s t e d
i n h i s t o r i c a l l i n g u i s t i c problems b u t i n s y n c h r o n i c p r i n c i p l e s and n o t i o n s
i n P a u l which might have i n f l u e n c e d S a u s s u r e ' s l i n g u i s t i c t h o u g h t . That
P a u l h i m s e l f d e r i v e d some of h i s i n s i g h t s from Whitney (and, of c o u r s e ,
from h i s own t e a c h e r S t e i n t h a l ) i s q u i t e obvious and does n o t concern u s
i n the present discussion. I n f a c t i t appears a s i f Paul attempted t o
r e c o n c i l e t h e opposing views of Whitney and S t e i n t h a l when h e a f f i r m e d
on t h e one hand t h a t l i n g u i s t i c s a s a moral s c i e n c e ( " K u l t u r w i s s e n s c h a f t l ' )
h a s i t s prime b a s i s i n psychology (1909:6) and on t h e o t h e r t h a t a l l
KuZtwz~issenschafti s always a s o c i a l s c i e n c e ("Gese11schaftswissenschaft",
5
P * 7).
P a u l ' s psychologism, however, i s n o t a s m i s l e a d i n g a s Bloomfield
(1933:17) tended t o s u g g e s t and s u r e l y n o t a s r i g o r o u s a s Kruszewski
(1881, 1883) i n h i s a p p l i c a t i o n of t h e p r i n c i p l e s of m e n t a l a s s o c i a t i o n
i n t h e f o r m u l a t i o n of l i n g u i s t i c laws, b u t h i s p s y c h o l o g i c a l e x p l a n a t i o n s
a r e g e n e r a l l y backed up and o f t e n s u r p a s s e d by t h e l a r g e amount of em-
p i r i c a l l i n g u i s t i c d a t a which h e accumulates t o i l l u s t r a t e h i s p o i n t .
P a u l , i t s h o u l d b e conceded, was n o t a s much of a t h e o r e t i c i a n a s p e r h a p s
S t e i n t h a l o r Kruszewski and, more s i g n i f i c a t l y , S a u s s u r e was, a s i s obvious
from h i s argument, much s u b j e c t e d and exposed t o t h e h i s t o r i c i s m and p o s i -
t i v i s m of h i s time. A s we s h a l l s e e i n t h e f o l l o w i n g p a r a g r a p h s , P a u l
a n t i c i p a t e d a number of l i n g u i s t i c c o n c e p t s and c o n t r a s t i n g terms which
a r e now a s s o c i a t e d w i t h S a u s s u r e ' s l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y , b u t h e a p p e a r s n e v e r
t o h a v e t a k e n them t o t h e c o n c l u s i o n which t h e Cows e x h i b i t s s o b e a u t i -
fully .

1.3.2.2.1 Paul ' s Distinction bztween Descriptive and Historical Linguis-

t i c s , and the Aspect of Language S t a t e

P a u l ' s o p p o s i t i o n t o any approach o t h e r t h a n h i s t o r i c a l i n l i n g u i s t i c s

(1909: 20) h a s become n o t o r i o u s i n t h e h i s t o r y of l i n g u i s t i c s , a s we have
noted above. He showed h i m s e l f t o b e aware of t h e fundamental d i f f e r e n c e s
between t h e s y n c h r o n i c and t h e d i h h r o n i c method when h e s r a t e d t h a t h i s -
t o r i c a l grammar had i t s s o u r c e i n t h e much o l d e r d e s c r i p t i v e grammar and
t h a t t h e former had "only a r r a n g e d a number of d e s c r i p t i v e grammars i n
p a r a l l e l form one a f t e r a n o t h e r . 116 P a u l c r i t i c i z e s d e s c r i p t i v e grammar
for 1 ) r e c o r d i n g o n l y t h e grammatical forms and r e l a t i o n s w i t h i n a g i v e n
l i n g u i s t i c community of a g i v e n p e r i o d and 2) f o r b a s i n g i t s r e s u l t s n o t
on f a c t s "but on an a b s t r a c t i o n of t h e f a c t s observed." (1909: 2 4 ) . He
concedes t h a t t h e comparison of v a r i o u s s t a g e s of a g i v e n language des-
c r i b e d i n t h i s manner would r e v e a l t h a t changes had t a k e n p l a c e and would
probably a l s o show a c e r t a i n r e g u l a r i t y , b u t h e m a i n t a i n s t h a t no c a u s a l
c o n n e c t i o n between t h e s e a b s t r a c t i o n s ( a s h e terms them) and t h e a c t u a l
f a c t s of language change can b e shown. P a u l ' s empiricism and g e n e r a l
d a t a o r i e n t a t i o n , i t would seem, does n o t p e r m i t him t o a b s t r a c t from
t h e d a t a i n o r d e r t o f o r m u l a t e g e n e r a l r u l e s of l i n g u i s t i c change.
P a u l ' s p o s i t i o n a p p e a r s t o become even more c o n f u s i n g when we n o t e
t h a t h e p o s t u l a t e s t h e n e c e s s i t y f o r a "Prinzipienwissenschaft" which
I'
i s occupied w i t h t h e g e n e r a l c o n d i t i o n s of l i f e of t h e h i s t o r i c a l l y evol-
v i n g o b j e c t " and which " i n v e s t i g a t e s t h e n a t u r e and e f f e c t s of f a c t o r s
c o n s t a n t l y p r e v a i l i n g d u r i n g a l l changes." ( 1 9 0 9 : l ) . Paul p o s i t s t h a t
t h i s general science i s an a u x i l i a r y science t o h i s t o r i c a l l i n g u i s t i c s
and d e n i e s s t r o n g l y t h e assumption t h a t h i s t o r i c a l and e m p i r i c a l v i e w p o i n t s
oppose each o t h e r . I n h i s view b o t h a r e e m p i r i c a l i n n a t u r e ( < b i d . ) .
I n f a c t , P a u l a t t e m p t s t o b r i d g e what h e b e l i e v e s t o b e t h e opposing s t a n d -
p o i n t s of t h e h i s t o r i c a l ( i . e . a l s o e m p i r i c a l ) and t h e p u r e s c i e n c e s which
a t t e m p t t o f o r m u l a t e laws ( P a u l c a l l s them) by i n t r o d u c i n g a " P r i n z i p i e n -
l e h r e " which i s c a p a b l e of d e m o n s t r a t i n g t h e i n t e r a c t i o n of t h e v a r i o u s
f o r c e s i n t h e l i f e of language (1909 :2 ) . P a u l hopes t o deduce t h e s e p r i n -
c i p l e s from t h e n a t u r e of h i s t o r i c development i t s e l f where t h e y a r e n o t of
p u r e l y l o g i c a l o r i g i n (p. 5 ) . Whatever t h e c o n f u s i o n s i n P a u l ' s argument
may b e , t h e r e can b e no doubt t h a t h i s i d e a s could e a s i l y have g i v e n r i s e
t o a number of s u g g e s t i o n s t o anyone w i t h a d e f i n i t e t r a i n i n g i n l o g i c
o r a g e n e r a l t h e o r e t i c a l i n c l i n a t i o n , such a s , f o r i n s t a n c e , S a u s s u r e
and D i t t r i c h . We b e l i e v e t h a t t h e f o l l o w i n g e q u a t i o n can t e n t a t i v e l y
 b e p a r a l l e l e d by Saussurean terms:
aZZgemeine Prinzipierwissenschaft = deskriptive Grammatik + histori-
sche G r m a t i k f o r Sprachgeschichte) whereby h i s t o r i c a l l i n g u i s t i c s h a s
been d e r i v e d from d e s c r i p t i v e s t u d i e s .
Zinguistique g&&aZe = Zinguistique statique (syn-
I n S a u s s u r e we f i n d :
chrony) + Zinguistique &oZutive ( d i a c h r o n y ) whereby t h e primacy of syn-
c h r o n i c l i n g u i s t i c s i s emphasized ( c f . CLG, 114-7).
I t s h o u l d b e added t h a t P a u l was w e l l aware of t h e p o s s i b i l i t y of
c o n s i d e r i n g l i n g u i s t i c s t a t e s ( c f . 1909:vi, where h e speaks of t h e "Be-
t r a c h t u n g von S p r a c h z u s t k d e n " ) . I n f a c t h e admits t h a t i t i s t h e t a s k
of t h e h i s t o r i a n of language t o s t a t e t h e sequence of p a r t i c u l a r language
states, b u t h i s emphasis on t h e e m p i r i c a l approach ( t h e o b j e c t of which
can o n l y b e t h e i n d i v i d u a l s p e a k e r ) makes t h e d e s c r i p t i o n of a language
s t a t e q u i t e u n a t t a i n a b l e and o b l i g e s t h e i n v e s t i g a t o r t o c o n t e n t h i m s e l f
with a r a t h e r imperfect p i c t u r e . However, P a u l hopes t h a t t h e c l o s e o b s e r -
v a t i o n of a number of i n d i v i d u a l s b e l o n g i n g t o t h e same speech community
and t h e comparison of t h e i r ' i d i o l e c t s ' c o u l d permit t h e d e d u c t i o n of a k i n d
of l i n g u i s t i c a v e r a g e which c o u l d b e e s t a b l i s h e d t h e b e t t e r t h e more i n -
d i v i d u a l s a r e i n v e s t i g a t e d and t h e more completely each i n v e s t i g a t i o n
i s c a r r i e d o u t (1909:29).
S a u s s u r e took t h e o p p o s i t e s t a n d when h e s t a t e d t h a t t h e f i r s t t h i n g
which s t r i k e s u s i n t h e s t u d y of t h e f a c t s of language i s t h a t t h e i r suc-
c e s s i o n i n t i m e does n o t e x i s t i n s o f a r a s t h e i n d i v i d u a l s p e a k e r i s con-
cerned: h e i s c o n f r o n t e d w i t h a s t a t e ( & a t ) . According t o S a u s s u r e (and
P a u l a p p e a r s t o have, u n w i t t i n g l y p e r h a p s , a n t i c i p a t e d him i n t h i s r e s p e c t )
t h e i n v e s t i g a t o r can e n t e r t h e mind of s p e a k e r s only by completely sup-
p r e s s i n g t h e p a s t and d i s c a r d i n g a l l knowledge of e v e r y t h i n g t h a t produced
it. S a u s s u r e a p p e a r s i n some s e n s e t o echo P a u l , who wished t o a c h i e v e
t h e l i n g u i s t i c a v e r a g e which d e t e r m i n e s "das e i g e n t l i c h Normale i n d e r
Sprache", i.e . t h e "Sprachusus" (1909: 29) , when s t a t i n g t h a t one cannot
e i t h e r d e s c r i b e o r draw up norms of ( l i n g u i s t i c ) usage e x c e p t by concen-
t r a t i n g on a g i v e n s t a t e (CLG, 1 1 7 ) .
It appears t h a t S a u s s u r e drew h i s c o n c l u s i o n s r e g a r d i n g t h e a n a l y s i s
of language s t a t e s and t h e n e c e s s i t y f o r s y n c h r o n i c l i n g u i s t i c s from t h e
apparent c o n t r a d i c t i o n s i n Paul's l i n g u i s t i c theorizing. Since there
i s no d i r e c t e v i d e n c e a v a i l a b l e t o s u p p o r t our c o n t e n t i o n , we s h a l l i l l u s -
t r a t e our p o i n t w i t h t h e h e l p of t h e argument p u t forward by Ottmar D i t t -
r i c h (1865 1951), a language p h i l o s o p h e r a t L e i p z i g and p u p i l of Wilhelm
Wundt (1832-1920), a l t h o u g h we do n o t wish t o imply t h a t i t was D i t t r i c h ' s
account of P a u l t h a t e x e r c i s e d a d i r e c t i n f l u e n c e on S a u s s u r e . Dittrich,
8
who w r o t e a review a r t i c l e on t h e t h i r d e d i t i o n of P a u l ' s Prinzipien (1898),
d e a l s a t some l e n g t h w i t h P a u l ' s l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r i e s i n t h e i n t r o d u c t o r y
p a r t of h i s GrundzEge der Sprachpsychologie of 1903.' I n f a c t almost a l l
t h e c h a p t e r e n t i t l e d "Sprachpsychologie und Sprachwissenschaf t" (5-63)
i s devoted t o a c r i t i c a l d i s c u s s i o n of P a u l ' s c o n t e n t i o n s a b o u t t h e s c i e n -
t i f i c i n v e s t i g a t i o n of language. -
D i t t r i c h maintains t h a t l i n g u i s t i c s c i e n c e
s h o u l d b e based on Wundt's g e n e r a l t h e o r y of psychology a s o u t l i n e d i n t h e
two volumes of Die Sprache o f 1900 - a view which was s t i l l h e l d by Bloom-
f i e l d i n 1914 - and a t t a c k s P a u l ' s views on p r a c t i c a l a s w e l l a s on p h i l o -
s o p h i c a l grounds. I n p a r t i c u l a r he r e j e c t s Paul's contention t h a t linguis-
t i c science i s i d e n t i c a l with h i s t o r i c a l l i n g u i s t i c s . Dittrich, after
having d i s s e c t e d P a u l ' s i d e a s , a r g u e s t h a t 1 ) P a u l was q u i t e u n a b l e t o
prove h i s p o i n t and t h a t i n f a c t h i s book c o n s t i t u t e s "a f l a m i n g p r o t e s t
a g a i n s t t h i s narrow d e f i n i t i o n of l i n g u i s t i c s c i e n c e , " and 2) t h a t r e a s o n s
of a g e n e r a l p h i l o s o p h i c a l n a t u r e ( " e r k e n n t n i s t h e o r e t i s c h e Grunde a l l g e -
m e i n s t e r Art") c o u l d b e b r o u g h t forward a g a i n s t P a u l ' s views (1903: 6-7) .
D i t t r i c h t h e n goes on t o show a t l e n g t h t h e f a u l t y l o g i c of P a u l ' s
argument (1903:8-50) - h e a l s o d i s c u s s e s on o c c a s i o n B e r t h o l d Delbriick's
(1842-1922) ob j e c t i o n s t o Wundt 's psychology of language1' - f i n a l l y sum-
m a r i z i n g h i s views concerning t h e v a r i o u s d i s c i p l i n e s which make up t h e
system of l i n g u i s t i c s c i e n c e : t h e h i s t o r y of language and l i n g u i s t i c geo-
graphy ( a s though f o l l o w i n g a n e x t e r n a l c h r o n o l o g i c a l - s p a t i a l o r d e r ) on
t h e one hand, and t h e mathematical d i s c i p l i n e of language s t a t i s t i c s on
t h e o t h e r which, however, D i t t r i c h i n t e n d s t o s u b o r d i n a t e t o t h e o t h e r
two a s p e c t s . But h e t h e n c o n t i n u e s t o e l u c i d a t e h i s views, s i n c e h e be-
l i e v e s i t n e c e s s a r y t o g i v e reasons f o r h i s s u b d i v i s i o n of t h e s c i e n c e
of language i n g e n e r a l and t h e d i s c i p l i n e s of t h e h i s t o r y of language i n
particular. D i t t r i c h holds t h a t h e b e l i e v e s i t t o b e imperative:
 . . . to d i s t i n g u i s h a s a r u l e t h e c o - e x i s t e n c e o r t h e chrono-
l o g i c a l o r d e r of phenomena g t a g i v e n p l a c e (syn- o r meta-
ehronism) a s w e l l a s t h e autonomy o r dependency (auto- o r
heteronony) of t h e t o t a l i t y of h i s t o r i c a l phenomena of l a n -
guage. I n t h i s way, through t h e synchronistic treatment of
phenomena uhieh are regarded as autonomous we a t t a i n c r o s s -
s e c t i o n s of t h e i d i o l e c t s and groups of speech ... (1903:
'

However, D i t t r i c h a r g u e s i n t h e subsequent sentences t h a t t h e t r a d i t i o n a l

d e s c r i p t i v e grammar a s w e l l a s s t y l i s t i c s , p o e t i c s , r h e t o r i c , m e t r i c s and
l e x i c a l s t u d i e s c o n f i n e d t o a g i v e n p e r i o d have i g n o r e d t h e i r s t a t u s a s
h i s t o r i c a l grammar w i t h r e g a r d t o t h e i r s y s t e m a t i c c h a r a c t e r b e c a u s e ,
h e h o l d s , t h e metachronic grammar h a s been i n t e r p r e t e d , i n c o n t r a s t t o t h e
s y n c h r o n i s t i c p r e s e n t a t i o n of l o n g i t u d i n a l i n t e r s e c t i o n s of i n d i v i d u a l
languages, a s h i s t o r i c a l grammar.
From t h e p r e c e d i n g arguments t h e r e i s every r e a s o n t o c l a i m t h a t
P a u l ' s emphasis on t h e h i s t o r i c a l approach t o language a n a l y s i s , t o g e t h e r
w i t h t h e o b j e c t i o n , c l a r i f i c a t i o n and renewed c o n f u s i o n by D i t t r i c h , could
n o t h a v e been overlooked by S a u s s u r e ( d e s p i t e many s t a t e m e n t s t o t h e con-
t r a r y which can b e found throughout t h e Prinzipien) when h e s e t o u t t o
l e c t u r e on t h e p r i n c i p l e s of g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s between 1907 and 1911.
However, t h i s does n o t mean t h a t S a u s s u r e developed h i s d i s t i n c t i o n between
s y n c h r o n i c and d i a c h r o n i c l i n g u i s t i c s a f t e r t h e p u b l i c a t i o n of D i t t r i c h ' s
book i n 1903 a s Eberhard Zwirner h a s r e c e n t l y a l l e g e d . l2 I n f a c t t h e
terms i n q u e s t i o n were used by S a u s s u r e a s e a r l y a s i n 1894,13 and p o s s i b l y
earlier. The u s e of ' m e t a c h r o n i s t i c ' v s . ' s y n c h r o n i s t i c ' i n t h e sense i n
which S a u s s u r e i n t r o d u c e d t h e terms of ' d i a c h r o n i c ' vs. 'synchronic' are
interesting h i s t o r i c a l coincidents. What i s more i m p o r t a n t , however,
i s t h a t P a u l ' s s t a t e m e n t s concerning h i s t o r i c a l l i n g u i s t i c s a s t h e o n l y
s c i e n t i f i c approach t o language d e s c r i p t i o n could n o t h a v e f a i l e d t o a r o u s e
S a u s s u r e ' s o p p o s i t i o n , i n p a r t i c u l a r , s i n c e P a u l was c o n t r a d i c t i n g h i m s e l f
on v a r i o u s occasion^.'^ It is t h e r e f o r e not unreasonable t o t h i n k t h a t
S a u s s u r e ' s i n c e s s a n t emphasis on s y n c h r o n i c l i n g u i s t i c s i n c o n t r a s t t o
d i a c h r o n i c l i n g u i s t i c s may w e l l h a v e had i t s s o u r c e i n h i s o v e r - r e a c t i o n
t o t h e views upheld i n P a u l ' s Prinzipien which r a n through f o u r e d i t i o n s
d u r i n g S a u s s u r e ' s l i f e t i m e add a p p e a r t o have been p r o v o c a t i v e t o S a u s s u r e
b e c a u s e of t h e i r l a c k of t h e o r e t i c a l c o n s i s t e n c y ( c f . SM, 5 1 ) . To r e i n f o r c e
our c l a i m i t should b e p o i n t e d o h t t h a t t h e a c t u a l trichotomy of s y n c h r o n i c
l i n g u i s t i c s , d i a c h r o n i c l i n g u i s t i c s and l i n g u i s t i c geography ( t o which
p a r t s 2 t o 4 of t h e Cowls a r e devoted) i s a n t i c i p a t e d i n P a u l ' s Prinzipien
( c f . e s p . chaps. 22 and 23) though more c l e a r l y p o i n t e d o u t on t h e o r e t i c a l
15
grounds by D i t t r i c h (op. cit.).

1.3.2.2.2 Language Usage versus Individual! Expression

Another d i s t i n c t i o n i n P a u l ' s Prinzipien which we b e l i e v e t o have

been i n f l u e n t i a l where S a u s s u r e ' s l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r i z i n g i s concerned i s
t h e o p p o s i t i o n between "Sprachusus " and " i n d i v i d u e l l e S p r e c h t Z t i g k e i t l '
(1909: 33) which i s p a r a l l e l e d by t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between "Gemeinsprache"
and " i n d i v i d u e l l e Sprachen" ( p . 413) a s w e l l a s by t h e s o c i a l c o n t r a s t
between t h e "Sprachgenossenschaft 'I ( a l s o " V e r k e h r s g e n o s ~ e n s c h a f t ~and
~)
t h e "Individuum" ( c f . 418-21 [passim]). P a u l opposes Wundt 's c o n c e p t i o n
of n a t i o n a l psychology ("VFlkerpsychologie") s t r o n g l y on s e v e r a l o c c a s i o n s .
Although h e s t a t e s i n t h e p r e f a c e t o t h e f o u r t h e d i t i o n of t h e Prinzipien
(1909 :v ) t h a t h e f o l l o w s t h e p r i n c i p l e s (though n o t t h e m e t a p h y s i c a l o u t l o o k )
of Johann F r i e d r i c h H e r b a r t (1776-1841), l6h e does n o t always a g r e e w i t h
t h e n a t i o n a l psychology p u t forward by Heyman S t e i n t h a l (1823-99) and
M o r i t z Lazarus (1824-1903) s i n c e 1860 i n t h e i r Zeitschrift fir EZker-
psychoZogie und Sprachwissenschaft and o t h e r p u b l i c a t i o n s 1 7 e i t h e r , d e s p i t e
t h e f a c t t h a t t h e y t o o adhered t o H e r b a r t ' s psychology. Wundt's approach
i s r e j e c t e d on t h e grounds t h a t Wundt b e l i e v e s t h a t l i n g u i s t i c changes h a v e
t h e i r o r i g i n i n t h e c o l l e c t i v e c o n s c i e n c e ("Volksseele") and n o t i n t h e
i n d i v i d u a l ("Einzelseele") , t h a t h e d e a l s w i t h language o n l y from t h e
p o i n t of view of t h e s p e a k e r and n o t a l s o from t h a t of t h e l i s t e n e r , and
f i n a l l y t h a t h e wishes t o draw h i s c o n c l u s i o n s from o b s e r v a t i o n s of language
t o t h e b e n e f i t of n a t i o n a l psychology and n o t v i c e v e r s a ( c f . P a u l , 1909:
v-vi) .I8 P a u l ' s b a s i c o b j e c t i o n , b e s i d e s a number of o t h e r s ( c f . 1909:
8-13)> t o Lazarus and S t e i n t h a l i s h i s c o n v i c t i o n t h a t only t h e i n d i v i d u a l
can b e t h e s u b j e c t of s c i e n t i f i c o b s e r v a t i o n and t h a t g e n e r a l n o t i o n s
can b e deduced o n l y from t h e i n v k s t i g a t i o n of a l a r g e number of i n d i v i d u a l s
(12-3). P a u l s t r e s s e s h i s c o n v i c t i o n t h a t every " l i n g u i s t i c c r e a t i o n i s
always t h e work of an i n d i v i d u a l " (18), and t h e r e f o r e a s s e r t s t h a t t h e
t r u e o b j e c t of t h e l i n g u i s t i s " t h e t o t a l i t y of m a n i f e s t a t i o n s of s p e e c h
a c t i v i t y i n a l l i n d i v i d u a l s i n t h e i r mutual i n t e r a c t i o n . I' l9 For t h i s
reason, i n o r d e r t o s e r v e a s a u s e f u l foundation f o r t h e h i s t o r i c a l t r e a t -
ment of language, t h e d e s c r i p t i o n of a language, P a u l a r g u e s , must n o t o n l y
l i s t a l l i t s i n d i v i d u a l c o n s t i t u e n t s b u t d e p i c t " t h e r e l a t i o n of t h e elements
t o each o t h e r , t h e i r r e l a t i v e s t r e n g t h s , t h e c o n n e c t i o n s i n t o which t h e y
e n t e r , t h e d e g r e e of c l o s e n e s s and s t r e n g t h of t h e s e c o n n e c t i o n s " ( 2 9 ) .
S i n c e , a s h a s been noted, P a u l f a v o u r s t h e i n d i v i d u a l psychology a s a g a i n s t
n a t i o n a l psychology on e m p i r i c a l grounds, a l l t h e s e l i n g u i s t i c a l l y c r u c i a l
r e l a t i o n s h i p s can b e found, a c c o r d i n g t o him, i n t h e language of t h e i n d i -
v i d u a l i n whose mind a r e embedded t h e i n t e r l o c k i n g groups of r e p r e s e n t a t i o n
("Vorstellungsgruppen") w i t h t h e i r m u l t i p l e i n t e r l a c e d r e l a t i o n s h i p s which
a r e r e l e v a n t t o speech a c t i v i t y ( c f . 27-31 [ p a s s i m ] ) . However, t o r e l a t e
t h e observed p h y s i c a l f a c t s t o m e n t a l ones i s , a c c o r d i n g t o P a u l , " p o s s i b l e
o n l y through a n a l o g i c a l i n f e r e n c e s b a s e d on what we have observed i n o u r
20
own minds" (30) ; t h i s means t h a t t h e l i n g u i s t i s h i s b e s t i n f o r m a n t ,
a b e l i e f which i s h e l d a g a i n by Chomsky i n o u r time.
Viewing t h e i n d i v i d u a l psyche a s t h e p l a c e of t h e a s s o c i a t i o n s and
c o n n e c t i o n s between language components P a u l b r i n g s h i s argument t o i t s
l o g i c a l c o n c l u s i o n when h e a s s e r t s t h a t we have t o d i s t i n g u i s h a s many
languages a s t h e r e a r e i n d i v i d u a l s . 21 There can b e no doubt t h a t t h i s
e m p i r i c a l p o i n t of view, which o b l i g e s P a u l t o a t t e s t t h a t even t h e i d i o -
l e c t i s s u b j e c t t o change and cannot b e r e g a r d e d a s a c o n s t a n t q u a n t i t y
(cf . 1909 :39-40) , c r e a t e s n o t o n l y a n i r r e c o n c i l a b l e o p p o s i t i o n between
t h e i n d i v i d u a l and s o c i e t y b u t d e s t r o y s any b a s i s f o r a g e n e r a l t h e o r y of
language. P a u l , however, a t t e m p t s t o b r i d g e t h i s o p p o s i t i o n by p o s i t i n g
a k i n d of i n t e r a c t i o n between t h e i n d i v i d u a l s p e a k e r s and, i n consequence,
between t h e language of t h e i n d i v i d u a l and t h e language of t h e speech
community. The l a t t e r , by c o n t r a s t w i t h t h e former, i s n o t h i n g b u t a n
' .
a r t i f a c t of t h e l i n g u i s t . The language custom ("Sprachusus") is a r r i v e d
a t by t h e comparison of a number of i d i o l e c t s , i s a n a b s t r a c t i o n and h a s
no e x i s t e n c e of i t s own (37-8); t o c a l l i t ' l i n g u i s t i c a v e r a g e ' ("Durch-
schnitt"; c f . 1909:29) does n o t make i t l e s s h y p o t h e t i c a l . I n f a c t lan-
guage custom, as a g a i n s t t h e t h e o r e t i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e which P a u l c l a i m s
f o r t h e l a n g u a g e of t h e i n d i v i d u a l , i s d e r i v a t i v e , vague and does n o t seem
22
t o yield t o a given structure.
A s h e d i d i n h i s s t a n d r e g a r d i n g synchrony v e r s u s diachrony i n l a n -
guage s t u d y , S a u s s u r e once a g a i n took t h e o p p o s i t e s i d e when h e i n t r o d u c e d
h i s i n f l u e n t i a l d i s t i n c t i o n between langue and parole i n h i s second c o u r s e
on g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s i n 1908. According t o S a u s s u r e language i s n o t
complete i n t h e i n d i v i d u a l b u t e x i s t s p e r f e c t l y o n l y i n t h e m u l t i t u d e
("masse" [CLG, 301). H e admits t h a t i t i s parole which makes t h e language
e v o l v e (CLG, 3 7 ) , b u t b e l i e v e s t h a t t h e s e two a s p e c t s c a n b e s e p a r a t e d
from each o t h e r , t o t h e e x t e n t t h a t one c a n make b o t h a n independent s u b j e c t
of l i n g u i s t i c i n v e s t i g a t i o n , and s u g g e s t s t h e f i r s t " b i f u r c a t i o n " n e c e s s a r y
i f one w i s h e s t o t h e o r i z e : t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between a l i n g u i s t i c s of l a
parole and a l i n g u i s t i c s of l a langue ( 3 8 ) , adding t h a t l i n g u i s t i c s p r o p e r
c a n o n l y b e concerned w i t h t h e l a t t e r ( 3 9 ) . S a u s s u r e could s e e t h e d i f f i -
c u l t i e s i n t o which P a u l had r u n w i t h h i s i n t e n t i o n t o make t h e ' i d i o l e c t '
t h e s o l e o b j e c t p r o p e r of l i n g u i s t i c i n v e s t i g a t i o n ; i t i s t h e r e f o r e n o t
s u r p r i s i n g t h a t h e never provided a l i n g u i s t i c s of l a parole a s t h e e d i t o r s
noted w i t h some r e g r e t (CLG, 197, n o t e ; c f . a l s o 2 . 2 . 1 ) . Van Hamel (1945:
79) b e l i e v e d t h a t ~ a u s s u r e ' s Zangue/paroZe dichotomy had been developed
i n p a r a l l e l t o t h e c o n t r a s t between s o c i o l o g y and psychology. This i s
c e r t a i n l y f a l s e as we have t r i e d t o e x p l a i n a t some l e n g t h e a r l i e r i n t h i s
s t u d y ( c f . 1.2) ; P a u l , on t h e o t h e r hand, may have been i n f l u e n c e d by t h e
o p p o s i t i o n between i n d i v i d u a l psychology and n a t i o n a l psychology when
f o r m u l a t i n g h i s d i s t i n c t i o n between "Sprachusus" and " i n d i v i d u e l l e Sprech-
tztigkeit". S a u s s u r e ' s d i s t i n c t i o n , a s we have attempted t o i l l u s t r a t e
( c f . 1.2.2), i s c e r t a i n l y n o t a d e r i v a t i v e from c o n s i d e r a t i o n s o u t s i d e
l i n g u i s t i c s p r o p e r b u t h a s sprung from a n i n n e r t h e o r e t i c a l n e c e s s i t y
(s. 2.2.1.2) making h i s dichotomy of synchrony v e r s u s diachrony a v a l i d
one. I t owes much, we b e l i e v e , t o t h e t h e o r e t i c a l d i f f i c u l t i e s P a u l en-
c o u n t e r e d w i t h t h i s p o s i t i v i s t and e m p i r i c a l approach t o t h e f a c t s of
language. 23 I n f a c t , when S a u s s u r e a f f i r m s t h a t langue i s independent
of t h e i n d i v i d u a l ( c f . CLG, 37; CLG(E), 56) and e x t e r n a l t o him (CLG, 30,
though n o t s u p p o r t e d by CLG(E) , 4 2 ) , i t seems t h a t t h e s e a f f i r m a t i o n s
c o n s t i t u t e i n some way a n o v e r - r e a c t i o n a g a i n s t P a u l ' s c o n t e n t i o n t h a t
language can o n l y b e observed i n t h e i n d i v i d u a l s p e a k e r .

1.3.2.2.3 Forrna l and Material Connections of Words

P a u l ' s Prinzipien may w e l l have been, a s W . K. P e r c i v a l h a s r e c e n t l y

s u g g e s t e d , 2 4 a s o u r c e of i n s p i r a t i o n w i t h r e g a r d t o S a u s s u r e ' s concept of
rapports a s s o c i a t i f s i n language (CLG, 170-5) . Arens (1969 :347) t o o
r e f e r s t o t h e s i m i l a r i t y between t h e views of P a u l and S a u s s u r e i n t h i s
r e s p e c t and draws a t t e n t i o n t o Kruszewski's d i s t i n c t i o n between "Angren-
..
z u n g s a s s o z i a t i o n e n " and "Ahnlichkeitsassoziationen", a p o i n t which we
s h a l l t a k e up i n a l a t e r c h a p t e r ( c f . 1 . 3 . 3 . 3 ) .
Humboldt a p p e a r s t o have i n t r o d u c e d t h e somewhat u n f o r t u n a t e d i s t i n c -
t i o n between S t o f f and Form ( c f . G . F . Meier, 1961: 16) which, p a r t i c u l a r l y
owing t o h i s v a r i o u s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s , h a s caused much c o n f u s i o n among
l a t e r g e n e r a t i o n s of l i n g u i s t s . P a u l a p p e a r s t o have c o n t r i b u t e d h i s
s h a r e t o t h i s q u e s t i o n a b l e t r a d i t i o n by d i s t i n g u i s h i n g between "s t o f f -
l i c h e " and "formale Gruppen", i.e . m a t e r i a l and formal groups, of l i n -
g u i s t i c o r g a n i s a t i o n (1909:106-20). A s a n a d h e r e n t of H e r b a r t ' s psycho-
logy of a s s o c i a t i o n ( c f . 25-8) developed by Lazarus, M i s t e l i , and S t e i n t h a l ,
P a u l m a i n t a i n s t h a t i n d i v i d u a l words a t t r a c t each o t h e r i n t h e human mind
("Seele") forming a number of s m a l l e r o r l a r g e r groups. This r e c i p r o c a l
a t t r a c t i o n , P a u l a s s e r t s , "is always based on p a r t i a l agreement between
s o u n d [ s ] o r meaning[s] o r sound and meaning t o g e t h e r . " (106). These groups
of a s s o c i a t i o n do n o t n e c e s s a r i l y remain s e p a r a t e d from each o t h e r b u t
may combine t o form f u r t h e r groups o r amalgamate. Paul exemplifies h i s
f o r m a l and m a t e r i a l groups i n t h e f o l l o w i n g manner: 1 ) M a t e r i a l groups
a r e f o r i n s t a n c e a ) t h e v a r i o u s c a s e s of a noun, b ) groups of words which
show a correspondence i n meaning which may a t times b e p a r a l l e l e d by formal
s i m i l a r i t i e s s i n c e an e t y m o l o g i c a l r e l a t i o n i s o f t e n t h e i r b a s i s , ( c )
t h o s e which a r e s e m a n t i c a l l y o p p b s i t e only, e . g . man v s . woman, g i r l v s .
boy, s i s t e r v s . brother, Zit-tZe v s . big, and d) f i n a l l y words which a r e
r e l a t e d by t h e i r c o n t e n t , e.g. sterben : Tod; gut : besser; b i n : i s t :
war. 2) Formal groups a r e , a c c o r d i n g t o P a u l , " t h e sum of a l l Nomina
a c t i o n i s , a l l comparatives, nominatives, a l l f i r s t p e r s o n s of v e r b s e t c . "
(1909:107). P a u l does n o t g i v e r e a s o n s f o r h i s c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s n o r a t t e m p t
any grouping of h i s examples ( a s we have t r i e d t o do above). He a p p e a r s
t o s e e more i n t e r r e l a t i o n s and c r o s s i n g s of groups, n o t i n g t h a t t h e m a t e r i a l
groups " a r e a s a r u l e c r o s s e d by t h e formal ones" ( i b i d . ) , t h a n any o r d e r
of any s p e c i f i c k i n d . Formal groups, P a u l o b s e r v e s , can b e h e l d t o g e t h e r
by p h o n e t i c agreement, e . g. Zibro : anno; mensae : rosae, b u t a l s o gab :
nahm; b o t : Zog, e t c . Although h e i s concerned w i t h d i f f e r e n t c a s e s and
t e n s e s e x p r e s s e d by t h e v e r b , P a u l does n o t speak o f p a r a d i g m a t i c r e l a t i o n s
a s one might h a v e e x p e c t e d . I n t h e subsequent paragraphs P a u l i n t r o d u c e s
further distinctions. Thus h e speaks of m a t e r i a l - f o r m a l groups of pro-
p o r t i o n s ("Proportionengruppen") and g i v e s t h e f o l l o w i n g examples : Tag :
Tages : Tage = A m : Armes : Arme = Fisch : Fisches : Fische; fiihren :
~ & r e r: r run^ = erziehen : Erzieher : Erziehung, e t c . (1909 :107) .
P a u l l a t e r on adds what h e c a l l s m a t e r i a l - p h o n e t i c o r e t y m o l o g i c a l - p h o n e t i c
groups a s w e l l a s c e r t a i n s y n t a c t i c a s s o c i a t i o n s ( c f . 1909:108-9). He
l i s t s a l l t h e s e v a r i o u s k i n d s of r e l a t i o n s i n o r d e r t o d e m o n s t r a t e t h a t
t h e r e must b e a combinatory a c t i v i t y i n t h e human mind which f u r n i s h e s
t h e s e k i n d s of groupings, s i n c e i t cannot b e expected t h a t we r e p r o d u c e
every i n d i v i d u a l word o r group of words. Paul c a l l s t h e underlying prin-
c i p l e , which p e r m i t s t h e s e v a r i o u s combinations and a s s o c i a t i o n s , a n ana-
l o g i c f o r m a t i o n o r analogy (1909:110), a p r i n c i p l e t o which h e d e v o t e s
ample s p a c e (pp. 110-20) s i n c e i t a p p e a r s t o b e one of h i s main e x p l a n a t i o n s
f o r l i n g u i s t i c change.
S a u s s u r e (CLG, 173-5) a p p e a r s t o have made s i m i l a r o b s e r v a t i o n s .
Mental a s s o c i a t i o n , S a u s s u r e o b s e r v e s , does n o t l i m i t i t s e l f t o comparing
t h o s e terms which have something i n common b u t t e n d s a l s o t o connect d i v e r s e
t h i n g s i n each i n d i v i d u a l c a s e , e s t a b l i s h i n g a s many a s s o c i a t i v e s e r i e s
a s t h e r e a r e d i v e r s e r e l a t i o n s ( c f . CLG(E), 287). S a u s s u r e does n o t a t t e m p t
a c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of a s s o c i a t i v e r e l a t i o n s , b u t c o n t e n t s h i m s e l f w i t h a
number of examples, some of which have b e e n l e f t o u t by t h e e d i t o r s of
t h e Cows. S a u s s u r e f o r i n s t a n c e observed t h a t t h e two words chapeau
and h z t e l have no c o n n e c t i o n whereas a r e l a t i o n can b e e s t a b l i s h e d when
we d e r i v e from them chapelier and h z t e l i e r r e s p e c t i v e l y (CLG(E), 286).
I n t h i s c a s e formal p r o p e r t i e s provide a p o s s i b i l i t y f o r a s s o c i a t i o n
( a l t h o u g h S a u s s u r e a d m i t t e d t h a t "dans t o u t e a s s o c i a t i o n d e formes, l e
s e n s y j o u e s o n r c l e " [ i b i d . 1).
S i m i l a r l y t h e word enseignement can b e a s s o c i a t e d i n o u r mind w i t h
enseigner, enseignons, e t c . s i n c e t h e y s h a r e t h e same r o o t (CLG, 173) ;
b u t enseignement could a l s o b e connected w i t h armement, changement, e t c .
b e c a u s e of t h e s u f f i x t h e y h a v e i n common (CLG, 1 7 4 ) . I n a d d i t i o n a mental
a s s o c i a t i o n may s p r i n g from t h e analogy of t h e s i g n i f i & , e . g . enseigne-
ment, instruction, apprentissage, gducation Cibid.; c f . CLG(E), 287).
These few examples a l r e a d y d e m o n s t r a t e t h a t one can compare t h e views of
S a u s s u r e w i t h t h o s e p u t forward by P a u l . By c o n t r a s t w i t h s y n t a g m a t i c
r e l a t i o n s which, i n S a u s s u r e ' s words, s u g g e s t immediately t h e i d e a of a n
o r d e r of s u c c e s s i o n , a s s o c i a t i v e r e l a t i o n s appear q u i t e undetermined and
l e s s p r e d i c t a b l e a s t o t h e k i n d of o r d e r i n which they may a r i s e ( c f .
CLG, 1 7 4 ) . 25 It i s t h e r e f o r e n o t s u r p r i s i n g t h a t n e i t h e r ~ a u s s u r en o r
P a u l can f o r m u l a t e , from a l i n g u i s t i c p o i n t of view, t h e c a t e g o r i e s i n -
volved i n a s s o c i a t i v e r e l a t i o n s a s t h e y o p e r a t e almost i n c e s s a n t l y i n t h e
human mind.
S a u s s u r e , a s P a u l d i d b e f o r e him, d i s t i n g u i s h e d t e n t a t i v e l y between
formal k i n d s of a s s o c i a t i v e r e l a t i o n s , e.g. chapeau : c h q e Z i e r = h c t e l :
h z t e l i e r , words which s h a r e t h e same r o o t o r s u f f i x ( s . a b o v e ) , and r e -
l a t i o n s which h a v e t h e i r o r i g i n i n s e m a n t i c s i m i l a r i t i e s , e . g . enseignement,
instruction, e t c . I n a d d i t i o n , S a u s s u r e does n o t f a i l t o mention t h a t
t h e r e c a n b e s i m u l t a n e o u s l y a s i m i l a r i t y of form and meaning a s w e l l (CLG,
174). This t r i p a r t i t e d i v i s i o n corresponds c l e a r l y t o Paul's d i s t i n c t i o n
between formale, stoffliehe-formale, and s t o f f l i c h e Gruppen; t h u s sub-
s t a n t i a t i n g P e r c i v a l ' s suggestion ( c f . f n . 24).
What remains t o b e t r a c e d i n t h e l i n g u i s t i c l i t e r a t u r e of t h e l a t e
19 t h c e n t u r y i s t h e s o u r c e of S a u s s u r e ' s i d e a s concerning s y n t a g m a t i c
r e l a t i o n s i n language f o r which P a u l , as f a r a s we can s e e , does n o t pro-
v i d e a model; f o r t h e mechanism of language i s based on r e l a t i o n s a l o n g t h e
syntagmatic s t r i n g a s w e l l a s on t h e l e s s e a s i l y a c c e s s i b l e a s s o c i a t i v e r e -
l a t i o n s ( c f . CLG, 177-80). The r e l a t i o n s which a r e e s t a b l i s h e d by t h e s u i t e
Zinzaire of speech w i l l b e compared i n t h e subsequent c h a p t e r ( c f . 1 . 3 . 3 . 3 )
w i t h Kruszewski's s u g g e s t i o n s c o n c e r n i n g a s s o c i a t i o n s of c o n t i g u i t y .
A f t e r Whitney, i t would seem t h e r e f o r e t h a t a n i m p o r t a n t s o u r c e of
S a u s s u r e ' s i n s p i r a t i o n ( a s w e l l a s c r i t i c i s m ) was P a u l ' s Prinzipien.
Three major c o n c e p t s of S a u s s u r e ' s l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y have been a n t i c i p a t e d
o r a t l e a s t s u g g e s t e d i n P a u l ' s o u t l i n e of h i s t o r i c a l l i n g u i s t i c s : 1)
The d i s t i n c t i o n between langue and parole ( c f . P a u l ' s dichotomies "Sprach-
usus" : " i n d i v i d u e l l e S p r e c h t g t i g k e i t " = " u s u e l l [ e ] " : " o k k a s i o n n e l [ e
Bedeutung]" = "Gemeinsprache" : " I n d i v i d u a l s p r a c h e " ["idiolect"] = "Ver-
kehrsgemeinschaf t" : "der ~ i n z e l n e " );26 2) t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between syn-
c h r o n i c and d i a c h r o n i c l i n g u i s t i c s ( c f . P a u l ' s d i s t i n c t i o n between "des-
k r i p t i v e " and % i s t o r i s c h e Sprachwissenschaft", and a l s o h i s d i s t i n c t i o n
between "Prinzipienwissenschaft" and "Sprachgeschichte", t h e former b e i n g
t h e b a s i s f o r t h e l a t t e r ) ; and 3) t h e concept of a s s o c i a t i v e r e l a t i o n s
i n language ( c f . P a u l ' s "f ormale" and " s t o f f l i c h e Gruppen")
27
.
We have a l r e a d y p o i n t e d o u t t h a t P a u l showed h i m s e l f t o b e aware of
t h e concept of 'language s t a t e ' (FdS: % a t d e langue"; P a u l : "Sprachzus tand")
which was t o become an i m p o r t a n t p r i n c i p l e of S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r y ( c f . L i e b ,
1968 and 1970), and a l s o t h a t P a u l d i d n o t n e g l e c t t h e s o c i a l a s p e c t of
language a l t h o u g h h e emphasized t h e importance of t h e i n d i v i d u a l i n language
and i t s e v o l u t i o n . I n s h o r t , P a u l ' s Prinzipien c e r t a i n l y d i d p l a y a n impor-
t a n t r $ l e i n t h e development of S a u s s u r e ' s l i n g u i s t i c t h o u g h t , n o t o n l y
ex negativo b u t a l s o q u i t e f r e q u e n t l y i n a p o s i t i v e s e n s e , a l t h o u g h t h e
n o t e s from S a u s s u r e a s w e l l a s from h i s p u p i l s which h a v e been r e c o v e r e d
28
s o f a r do n o t make any e x p l i c i t acknowledgement of t h i s u n d e n i a b l e f a c t .
G. Helbig h a s r e c e n t l y p o i n t e d o u t t h a t P a u l ' s Prinzipien c o n t a i n e d
'hoereits den Keim zur Selb s tGberwindung mancher j unggrammatischer Axiome"
(1970:18), and we may a p p r o p r i a t e l y conclude o u r d i s c u s s i o n on t h e r e l a t i o n
between P a u l and S a u s s u r e w i t h a s t a t e m e n t t o t h e e f f e c t t h a t , a s M. 1vi6
noted a few y e a r s ago (1965:62), much of what P a u l had s a i d i n a somewhat
v e r b o s e and i n c h o a t e f a s h i o n appeared i n a f a r more s y s t e m a t i c manner a s a
29
b a s i c t e n e t of S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r y .
 FOOTNOTES - 1.3.2.2

Both reviewed a t l e n g t h t h e f i r s t ed. of P a u l (1880), T o b l e r i n

LGRP 2.4, c o l l . 121-6 ( l 8 8 l ) , and M i s t e l i i n ZfWs 13: 382-409 (1882) ;
s. a l s o F r a n z Techmer's (1843-91) review of t h e f i r s t and second e d i t i o n s
of P a u l ' s Prinzipien i n IZAS 3:356-61 (1887). We expound t h i s f a c t be-
c a u s e we w i s h t o s t r e s s t h a t P a u l ' s emphasis on h i s t o r i c a l l i n g u i s t i c s
a s t h e s o l e s c i e n t i f i c approach t o language was opposed, a s e a r l y a s i n
t h e 1880s,by a number of h i s contemporaries i n Germany and n o t o n l y by
FdS i n h i s P a r i s and Geneva l e c t u r e s .

.
Cf Die Darwin 'sche Theorie und die Sprachwiss ens chaft (W eimar :
BEhlau, 1863) ; 2nd ed. 1873, p. 10.

The p a s s a g e i n which P a u l defended h i s s t a n d p o i n t i s on p. 19 of

t h e 2nd ed. (1886) and p. 20 of t h e 3 r d and subsequent e d i t i o n s of t h e
Prinzipien. We p o i n t o u t t h i s f a c t t o c o u n t e r a c t t h e s u g g e s t i o n made by
T a g l i a v i n i (1963: 304-5) and o t h e r s which m i s l e a d i n g l y i n t e r p r e t s P a u l 's
i n s i s t e n c e on t h e h i s t o r i c a l t r e a t m e n t of language a s a r e a c t i o n a g a i n s t
FdS's a f f i r m a t i o n s i n t h e Cours of 1916. Note t h a t we s h a l l q u o t e from
t h e f i n a l v e r s i o n of t h e Prinzipien which appeared i n 1920 and h a s been
r e p r i n t e d f r e q u e n t l y e v e r s i n c e ; t h e l a s t e d i t i o n appeared i n 1970 (Tcbingen:
M. Niemeyen). We b e l i e v e t h a t t h e p r o c e d u r e t o q u o t e from t h e l a s t v e r s i o n
is j u s t i f i e d on t h e f o l l o w i n g grounds, though we s h a l l - f o r r e a s o n s c i t e d
above - r e f e r t o t h e 4 t h ed. of 1909: 1 ) t h e 5 t h ed. i s p r a c t i c a l l y iden-
. .
t i c a l w i t h t h e 4 t h ( c f Prinzipien of 19 70, p v i i i ) ; 2) t h e 3 r d (189 8)
and 4 t h (1909) e d i t i o n s f o l l o w t h e 2nd r e v . and e n l . ed. o f 1886 v e r y
c l o s e l y a d d i n g mainly new d a t a and b i b l i o g r a p h i c a l r e f e r e n c e s ; 3) i n f a c t
we h a v e compared t h e 1st ed. of 1880 w i t h t h e 5 t h of 1920 and can a f f i r m
t h a t t h e f o l l o w i n g p a s s a g e s a r e almost i d e n t i c a l : 1920:l-20 = 1880:l-23;
1920:20-2 w e r e r e w r i t t e n i n 1886; 1920:23-8 = 1880:26-33; 1920:29-36,
esp. pp. 29-31 were r e v i s e d i n 1886; 1920: 37-48 = 1880: 231-44 w i t h changes
of emphasis on p. 40; 1920:49-73 = 1880: 40-60, w i t h t h e e x c e p t i o n of pp. ,
62-7 which w e r e added i n 1886 a s w e l l a s t h e l a s t t h r e e p a r a g r a p h s on p.
73; 1920: 106-15 = 1880: 61-76, w i t h some changes and minor a d d i t i o n s ; 1920:
115-20 was added i n 1886; 1920:404-22 = 1880:266-88. The same a p p l i e s
t o 1920: 174-88 = 1880: 183-99; 1920: 189-216 = 1880: 78-99; 1920: 242-50 =
1880: 145-53; 1920: 251-62 = 1880: 131-44; 1920: 352-72 = 1880: 200-30, and
1920:373-89 = 1880:245-65, c h a p t e r s which do n o t concern us h e r e a s t h e y do
n o t r e l a t e t o s y n c h r o n i c concepts o r methods. I n c a s e s where q u e s t i o n s
of p r i o r i t y a r e involved e a r l i e r e d i t i o n s of t h e Prinzipien w i l l b e con-
sulted as well.
4
S. t h e chaps., "The T h e o r i e s of Hermann Paul" and he Neogrammarian
H e r i t a g e : Saussure", which c o n s t i t u t e t h e b u l k of t h e i n t r o d u c t o r y p a r t
and which, a c c o r d i n g t o t h e a f f i r m a t i o n of t h e two co-authors of t h e s t u d y
(p. 9 8 ) , a r e e x c l u s i v e l y W e i n r e i k h ' s work, i n "Empirical Foundations f o r
a Theory of Language Change", by U . Weinreich, William Labov, and Marvin
I. Herzog i n Directions for Historical Linguistics: A Symposium, ed. by
W[infred] P [ h i l i p p ] Lehmann and Yakov M a l k i e l (Austin & London: Univ. of
Texas P r e s s , 1968), 95[97]-188; h e r e pp. 104-19, 119[120]-22.

We q u o t e from t h e 4 t h ed. of P a u l ' s Prinzipien which i s e s s e n t i a l l y

i d e n t i c a l w i t h t h e 2nd of 1886; c f . n o t e 3.

Prinzipien, 23; P a u l ' s e x p r e s s i o n " p a r a l l e l a n e i n a n d e r gefiigt"

e x h i b i t s t h e f a u l t y l o g i c of h i s a t times r a t h e r clumsy and d i f f u s e s t y l e .
S i n c e d e s c r i p t i v e grammar d e s c r i b e s one language from a s y n c h r o n i c p o i n t
of view o n l y , P a u l would h a v e done b e t t e r t o s a y " z e i t l i c h nacheinander",
i . e . i n c h r o n o l o g i c a l o r d e r , o r something s i m i l a r .
7
The p a s s a g e r e a d s : "Sehen w i r nun, w i e s i c h b e i d i e s e r Natur d e s
Objekts d i e Aufgabe des Geschichtsschreibers s t e l l t . Der Beschreibung
von Zustiinden w i r d e r n i c h t e n t r a t e n kFnnen, da e r e s m i t g r o s s e n Kom-
p l e x e n von g l e i c h z e i t i g neben e i n a n d e r l i e g e n d e n Elementen zu t u n h a t . "
(lgO9:29). The u l t i m a t e g o a l of l i n g u i s t i c r e s e a r c h must b e , a c c o r d i n g
t o P a u l , t o d e s c r i b e t h e mechanism of t h e SprachgefZhZ.

S. ZRPh 23: 538-53 (1899).

P a r t I [ t h e o n l y p a r t p u b l i s h e d ] : Einleitung und allgerneine Grund-

Zegung (Halle: M . Niemeyer, 1903), xv + 786 + 9 5 [ B i l d e r a t l a s ] .
.
Cf Wund t , vijlkerps ychologie: Eine Untersuchung der Entwicklungs-
gesetze von Sprache, Mythos und S i t t e . Vol. I , P a r t s I and 11: Die Sprache
(Leipzig: W. Engelmann, 1900), 3rd ed., 1911-12, w + 627, and x + 644 yp.;
Delb riick, Grundfragen der Sprachforschung, mit Riicksicht auf W . Wundt ' s
Sprachpsychologie e r a r t e r t ( S t r a s s b u r g : K . J . Triibner, 1 9 0 1 ) , v i i + 180
.
pp , and Wundt I s r e p l y , Sprachgeschichte und Sprachpsychologie, mit Riick-
s i c h t auf B. De Zbriicks "Grundfragen der Sprachforschung " (Leip z i g : W .
Engelmann, 1901), 100 pp. S. a l s o D i t t r i c h , 1903:75-6 ( n o t e ) , and h i s
review of Wundt's w r i t i n g s i n ZRPh 27:198-216 (1903). Another, though
l e s s convincing, c r i t i c i s m of Wundt i s t h e book by Ludwig S i i t t e r l i n (1863-
1934), Das Wesen der sprachzichen GebiZde: Kritische Bemerkungen zu W.
Wundts Sprachpsychologie (Heidelberg: C . W i n t e r , 1902), v i i + 192 pp.
There can b e no doubt t h a t S a u s s u r e followed t h i s d e b a t e w i t h much i n -
t e r e s t ; h i s own psychologism r e v e a l s how much h e h i m s e l f was i n f l u e n c e d
by t h e i d e a s p r e v a i l i n g a t t h i s t i m e .
11
We q u o t e t h e p a s s a g e from t h e G. o r i g i n a l i n f u l l b e c a u s e we be-
l i e v e i t t o b e an i m p o r t a n t document f o r t h e h i s t o r y of l i n g u i s t i c t h o u g h t ,
b o t h i n i t s a p p a r e n t t h e o r e t i c a l r i g o u r and i t s f i n a l confusion:
II
... gewisse Beziehungen d e r S p r a c h g e s c h i c h t e zu den iibrigen von uns
behaup t e t e n notwendigen T e i l e n d e r Sprachwissenschaf t l a s s e n uns doch
a l s wiinschenswert e r s c h e i n e n , h i e r w e n i g s t e n s d i e n s c h s t e n Unterteilungs-
griinde m d darauf ruhenden UnterdiszipZinen der ~prachgeschichte anzugeben,
w i e w i r s i e a l s notwendig e r a c h t e n . Was d i e e r s t e r e n b e t r i f f t , h a l t e n
w i r e s f k unumgEnglich, d a s ZugJeich - bezw. Nacheinanderdasein d e r
.
Erscheinungen an b e s timmtem O r t (Syn - bezw Metachronismus) s o w i e d i e
. .
S e l b s t z n d i g k e i t bezw ~ b h z n g i g k e i t(Auto - bezw Heteronomie) d e r Gesamt-
h e i t d e r h i s t o r i s c h e n Erscheinungen d u r c h g k g i g zu u n t e r s c h e i d e n . W i r
gelangen s o durch s y n c h r o n i s t i s c h e Behandlung d e r aZs autonom angesehenen
Erscheinungen zu Q u e r d u r c h s c h n i t t e n d e r E i n z e l s p r a c h e n und Sprachgruppen,
d e r e n D a r s t e l l u n g i n Form d e r ' d e s c r i p t i v e n ' Grammatik, S t i l i s t i k , Rhe-
t o r i k , P o e t i k , M e t r i k , P r o s o d i k sowie d e s ebensolchen ~ a r t e r b u c h sd e r i n
e i n e r gewissen Z e i t s c h i c h t f i x i e r t gedachten E i n z e l s p r a c h e n und Sprach-
gruppen (Grammatik d e r d e u t s c h e n Sprache am Ende des 1 9 . J a h r h u n d e r t s ,
usw.) a l l g e m e i n b e k a n n t , a b e r b e z c g l i c h i h r e s s y s t e m a t i s c h e n C h a r a k t e r s
a l s h i s t o r i s c h e Grarrunatik usw. d e r z e i t wohl ebenso a l l g e m e i n v e r k a n n t i s t ,
und zwar, w e i l man [ r e f e r e n c e t o P a u l , P r i n z i p i e n , 291 gew6hnlich n u r d i e
m e t a c h r o n i s t i s c h e Grammatik usw., d i e i m Gegensatz zu d e r s y n c h r o n i s t i s c h e n
i n d e r D a r s t e l l u n g von ~ h g s d u r c h s c h n i t t e nd e r E i n z e l s p r a c h e n und Sprach-
gruppen b e s t e h t , a l s h i s t o r i s c h e Grammatik usw. a n s i e h t ." (Dittrich,
Grundzzi'ge, 50-1). D i t t r i c h comments t h a t h e does n o t s e e t h e n e c e s s i t y t o
add a n y t h i n g i n d e f e n c e of h i s views.

l2 Zur Herkunft und Funktion d e s B e g r i f f s p a a r e s Synchronie - Dia-

chronic", S p r a c h e d e r G e g e m a r t V, 30-51; h e r e p. 38.

l3 I n t h e i n d e x FdS p r e p a r e d f o r a book which h e i n t e n d e d t o w r i t e

i n 1894 o r t h e r e a b o u t ( c f . SM, 3 7 ) , h e d e f i n e d "diachronique" a s "oppos6
2 synchronique ou i d i o s y n c h r o n i q u e " (SM, 4 9 ) .
l 4 Cf. a l s o P a u l ' s s t a t e m e n t t h a t a "Beschreibung e i n e s Sprachzus-
t a n d e s zu l i e f e r n , d i e i m s t a n d e i s t e i n e durchaus b r a u c h b a r e U n t e r l a g e
5% d i e g e s c h i c h t l i c h e Forschung zu l i e f e r n , ,ist ...keine l e i c h t e ,
u n t e r Ums t h d e n e i n e h6chs t s c h w i e r i g e Auf gabe, zu d e r e n L6sung b e r e i t s
K l a r h e i t iiber das Wesen des Sprachlebens g e h 6 r t . " ( P r i n z i p i e n , p 31) . .
l5 A s f o r t h e synchrony/diachrony d i s t i n c t i o n , we can add t h a t P a u l
d i d i n f a c t d i s t i n g u i s h between LautwandeZ (= a d i a c h r o n i c p r o c e s s ) and
LautuechseZ (= t h e s y n c h r o n i c c o u n t e r p a r t which, a c c o r d i n g t o P a u l , "ist
n i c h t m i t dem Lautwandel i d e n t i s c h , sondern. .. nur e i n e Nachwirkung
desselben") . S. P r i n z i p i e n , p . 68. U. Weinreich ( i n h i s a r t i c l e r e f e r r e d
t o i n n o t e 4, h e r e pp. 115-6) b e l i e v e s t h a t P a u l ' s moderate views c o n c e r n i n g
sound laws were i l l u m i n a t e d b y Kruszewski's c r i t i c i s m , and t h e d i s t i n c t i o n
between h i s t o r i c a l l y a s s e r t e d sound changes and s y n c h r o n i c a l l y a c t i v e
v o c a l i c a l t e r n a t i o n s was d e r i v e d from h i s monograph i%er d i e Lautabwechs-
lung of 1881 ( t h e r e f e r e n c e op. cit., p. 192, i s i n c i d e n t a l l y i n c o r r e c t ) ,
an a s s e r t i o n which h e a t t e m p t s t o s u b s t a n t i a t e by t h e f a c t t h a t P a u l r e -
f e r r e d t o Kruszewski's w r i t i n g s which appeared i n v o l s . 1-111, and V of
I Z A S (1884-90) . Although t h i s i s a n unconvincing argument s i n c e P a u l ' s
d i s t i n c t i o n was i n t r o d u c e d i n t h e 2nd ed. of t h e P r i n z i p i e n (1886), and t h e
r e f e r e n c e t o Kruszewski was n o t added b e f o r e t h e 4 t h ed. of 1909! ( C f .
P a u l , 1 9 0 9 : x i v i n c o n t r a s t t o t h e 3rd ed. of 1898, p. x i ) . The o n l y two
r e f e r e n c e s t o Kruszewski (IZAS 2:260-8 [I8851 and 3:145-70 [1887]) and
 TZAS 5:133-44), 339-48 [1890]) a r e found on p. 49, n.1, and p. 189,
n . 1 r e s p e c t i v e l y . There i s a s e r i o u s p o s s i b i l i t y of such an i n f l u e n c e :
Brugmann w r o t e a review of Kruszewski's Lautabwechslung which appeared
i n LC 32, c o l l . 400-1 (1882). Brugmann, however, d i d n o t g r a s p t h e
meaning of Krus zewski 's term "Lautabwechslung"!

l6 See h i s books, Lehrbuch d e r Psycho Zogie ( K h i g s b e r g : Unzer,

1 8 1 6 ) , and t h e 2 v o l s . of h i s P s y c h o l o g i e aZs Wissenschaft, neu gegrun-
d e t auf Erfahrung, Metaphysik vnd Mathematik ( i b i d . , 1824-25) .
l7 Cf. t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n by S t e i n t h a l and Lazarus, Z j W s 1 : l - 7 3
(1860), and a l s o S t e i n t h a l , E i n Z e i t u n g i n d i e P s y c h o l o g i e und Sprach-
w i s s e n s c h a f t ( B e r l i n : F. Summler, 1 8 7 1 ) , x x i i i + 487 pp., and L a z a r u s ,
D a s Leben d e r S e e l e , v o l . 11: G e i s t und Sprache: Eine p s y c h o l o g i s c h e
Monographie, 2nd ed. ( i b i d . , 1878); 3 r d ed., 1885, x v i + 411 pp.

Cf. a l s o 1vi6 (1965:52-5) and, i n p a r t i c u l a r , Arens (1969:415-6).

Cf. h i s s t a t e m e n t : "Alles d r e h t s i c h m i r darum d i e Sprachent-

wickelung aus d e r Wechselwirkung a b z i i l e i t e n , welche d i e I n d i v i d u e n auf
.
e i n a n d e r ausuben. " (p 1 2 , n. 1 ) .
20 P a u l p r o c l a i m s i n f a c t : " I m e r von neuem a n g e s t e l l t e e x a k t e
S e l b s t b e o b a c h t u n g , s o r g f z l t i g e Analyse d e s e i g e n e n S p r a c h g e f i h l s i s t
d a h e r u n e n t b e h r l i c h f i i r d i e Schulung d e s S p r a c h f o r s c h e r s . " ( P r i n z i p i e n ,
30).

21 "In W i r k l i c h k e i t werden i n jedem Augenblicke i n n e r h a l b e i n e r

Volksgemeinschaft s o v i e l e D i a l e k t e g e r e d e t a l s redende I n d i v i d u e n vor-
handen s i n d " ( P r i n z i p i e n , 38) .
22 T h i s a p p e a r s somewhat c o n t r a d i c t e d by P a u l ' s f i n e t e r m i n o l o g i c a l
d i s t i n c t i o n between " u s u e l l " and " o k k a s i o n e l l " when d e a l i n g w i t h s e m a n t i c
change ( P r i n z i p i e n , 7 4 f f . ) .

23 FdS s u r e l y echoes P a u l when h e s t a t e s : "Entre t o u s l e s i n d i v i d u s

a i n s i r e l i g s p a r l e l a n g a g e [ i . e . by t h e s o c i a l n a t u r e o f l a n g u a g e ] ,
il s 1 6 t a b l i r a une s o r t e d e moyenne: t o u s r e p r o d u i r o n t , -
non exactement
s a n s d o u t e , mais approximativement - l e s msmes s i g n e s u n i s a u x mgmes
concepts." (CLG, 2 9 ) . FdS r e g a r d s h e t e r o g e n i t y w i t h i n t h e "Sprachusus",
it would seem, n o t a s a s u b j e c t of s y s t e m a t i c d e s c r i p t i o n , b u t a s a kind
of i m p r e c i s i o n of performance i n conformity w i t h P a u l ' s view: "Die g r o s s e
G l e i c h m k s i g k e i t a l l e r s p r a c h l i c h e n Vorgznge i n den v e r s c h i e d e n e n In-
dividuen ist d i e wesentliche Basis fiir e i n e exakt w i s s e n s c h a f t l i c h e
Erkenntnis derselben." ( P r i n z i p i e n , 19 [spaced i n t h e o r i g i n a l ] ) .

24 I n p r i v a t e correspondence (of Dec. 1 0 , l97O), P e r c i v a l , who h a s

been e n g a g e d , i n p r e p a r i n g a r e e d i t i o n of H. A. S t r o n g , W. S. Logeman,
and B. I. Wheeler's E. a d a p t i o n of P a u l ' s P r i n z i p i e n , I n t r o d u c t i o n t o t h e
H i s t o r y of Language (London: Longmans, 1891), s t a t e d : "I have always
been s t r u c k by t h e s i m i l a r i t y between S a u s s u r e ' s concept of a s s o c i a t i v e
r e l a t i o n s and Hermann ~ a u l ' sn o t i o n of s t o f f l i c h e und f o r m a l e Gruppen
.
( P r i n z i p i e n , c h a p t e r 5) " ,

25 FdS s e p a r a t i n g synchrony and diachrony from each o t h e r i n h i s

e x p o s i t i o n f a i l s t o draw a t t e n t i o n t o h i s d i s c u s s i o n of t h e r a p p o r t s
a s s o c i a t i f s when h e t r e a t s analogy (CLG, 221-30, 231-7) a l t h o u g h h e
c l e a r l y s t a t e s t h a t t h i s phenomenon " e s t d ' o r d r e psychologique" (CLG,
226).

26 A f t e r completion of t h i s s e c t i o n we came a c r o s s P i e r o M e r i g g i ' s

paper, "Die Junggrammatiker und d i e h e u t i g e Sprachwissenschaft", S p r a c h e
12:l-15 (1966) i n which t h e a u t h o r s t r e s s e s t h i s p a r a l l e l a d d i n g t h a t
n o t o n l y t h e d i s t i n c t i o n was f o r e s t a l l e d by P a u l b u t a l s o t h e c a u s a l
r e l a t i o n between t h e s e two opposing f a c t o r s i n language and i t s develop-
ment; s. loc. c i t . , 1, n.1, and c f . a l s o P[S]ICPS, 23 (1965).

27 S a u s s u r e ' s u n d e r l y i n g psychology i s v e r y s i m i l a r t o P a u l ' s when

h e s t a t e s t h a t t h e o r g a n i s a t i o n of language a s a system ( w i t h i n t h e mind
of t h e i n d i v i d u a l ) deperadson t h e e x i s t e n c e of a " f a c u l t 6 d ' a s s o c i a t i o n
e t d e c o o r d i n a t i o n " (CLG, 2 9 ) .

28 A number of o t h e r e x p r e s s i o n s i n P a u l ' s P r i n z i p i e n a p a r t from

t h o s e mentioned above c o u l d b e compared w i t h terms i n t h e C o w s ; c f .
"Verkehr " ( P r i m i p i e n , 39) : " i n t e r c o w l s e " (CLG, 281) ; " L a u t b i l d " (op.
cit., 52, 58) : "image a c o u s t i q u e " (CLG, 28, 32, 98-9); P a u l s p e a k s of
t h e " ~ r a n f & ~ l i c h ~usammenkniipfung
e von Laut und Bedeutung" (op. cit.,
35) i n c o n t r a s t t o FdS's ' a r b i t r a i r e ' ; i n P a u l ' s book t h e e x p r e s s i o n
of system i s used q u i t e f r e q u e n t l y , e.g."Lautsystem d e r Sprache" (53;
c f . a l s o 106) o r h i s s t a t e m e n t : "Es b e s t e h t i n a l l e n Sprachen e i n e
gewisse Harmonie d e s Lautsystems." (57; c f . Kruszewski i n IZAS 2:264
[I8851 who makes t h e same a f f i r m a t i o n r e f e r r i n g a t t h e same time t o
S i e v e r s ' ~ r u n d z G g ed e r P h o n e t i k of 1881) ; s. a l s o P a u l ' s d i s t i n c t i o n
between "Lautwandel" (FdS's changement phondtique [CLG, 1991) and "Laut-
wechsel" (FdS's a l t e r m a n e e [CLG, 2 1 6 ] ) , P r i n z i p i e n , 68 ( a l r e a d y mentioned
above). F u r t h e r p a r a l l e l s c o u l d probably b e d e t e c t e d .

29 For a more e x p l i c i t and i n p a r t s more c o h e r e n t s t a t e m e n t t o t h i s

e f f e c t , s e e now E. F. K. Koerner, "Hermann P a u l and Synchronic L i n g u i s t i c s " ,
t o appear i n Lingua.
1.3.2.3 Eduard S i e v e r s and H i s P r i n c i p l e s o f P h o n e t i c s
I

Although S a u s s u r e ' s temporary a s s o c i a t i o n w i t h t h e neogrammarians

h a s n o t been c o n t e s t e d by anybody, t h e i n f l u e n c e of i d e a s e x p r e s s e d by
members of t h e "Leipzig School" on him a r e g e n e r a l l y minimized o r com-
p l e t e l y ignored i n t h e h i s t o r i e s of l i n g u i s t i c s . The neogrammarians
have been c r i t i c i z e d f o r t h e i r "atomism" and d a t a - o r i e n t a t i o n and l i t t l e
a t t e n t i o n h a s been p a i d t o t h o s e members of t h e junggrammatische Richtung
who d i s p l a y e d a pronounced i n t e r e s t i n f o r m u l a t i n g g e n e r a l p r i n c i p l e s of
language a n a l y s i s . We b e l i e v e t h a t , second t o P a u l , i t i s Eduard S i e v e r s
who d e s e r v e s o u r a t t e n t i o n w i t h r e g a r d t o h i s s y s t e m a t i c approach t o t h e
p h o n e t i c a s p e c t of language.
I n t h e h i s t o r y of l i n g u i s t i c s i t i s t h e p e r i o d r e g a r d i n g t h e Jung-
grammatiker p a r t i c u l a r l y which needs t o b e r e w r i t t e n ; books h i t h e r t o
a v a i l a b l e on t h i s s u b j e c t a r e a t b e s t s k e t c h y , m o s t l y c o n t r a d i c t o r y
and f u l l of s e r i o u s o m i s s i o n s . There i s n o t even unanimity t o b e found
among them a s t o who a c t u a l l y belonged t o t h e f i r s t g e n e r a t i o n of neo-
grammarians.1 We b e l i e v e t h a t t h e o r i g i n a l groups of l i n g u i s t s a t L e i p z i g
around F r i e d r i c h Zarncke (1825-91) and Georg C u r t i u s (1820-85) were
Brugmann and Osthoff who were a s s o c i a t e d w i t h K a r l Verner (1846-96),
August Leskien (l84O-l9l6), and p r o b a b l y a l s o w i t h H e i n r i c h ~iibschmann
(1848-1908); Wilhelm S c h e r e r (1841-86) a p p e a r s t o have played a germinal
r81e s i m i l a r t o Whitney's.* A t t h e a g e of twenty S i e v e r s (1850-1932)
t r a n s l a t e d Vilhelm ~ h o m s e n ' s (1842-1927) s t u d y of 1869 on t h e i n f l u e n c e
of Germanic on t h e language of t h e Lapps and ~ i n n i s h . ' According t o
Pedersen (1962:305) h e was "very c l o s e t o t h e c i r c l e of young L e i p z i g e r s "
a t t h e t i m e , and h i s Grundziige der LautphysioZogie of 1876, which i s
g e n e r a l l y a c c e p t e d a s marking a t u r n i n g p o i n t i n p h o n e t i c s ( c f . 1vi6,
1965:108; Malmberg, 1964:99; Kukenheim, 1966:83; f o r an o p p o s i t e view,
s . H ~ u s l e r , 1968:42) s t o o d sponsor i n a way, a s Pedersen p o i n t s o u t ,
t o Brugmann's famous t h e o r y of "Nasalis sonans" of t h e same y e a r , i n which
4
Brugmann r e f e r s t o ~ i e v esr ' book.
S i e v e r s , probably t h e most b r i l l i a n t of t h e neogrammarians, a s
W. P. Lehmann (1967:210f.) p o i n t s o u t , became p r o f e s s o r of German p h i l o l o g y
a t J e n a U n i v e r s i t y a t t h e a g e of twenty-one, and i n 1876 t h e f i r s t c h a i r
of t h i s s u b j e c t was e s t a b l i s h e d f o r him a t t h e same u n i v e r s i t y , 5 t h e
same y e a r t h a t h i s Grundziige appeared i n L e i p z i g . It w i l l b e r e c a l i e d
t h a t S a u s s u r e a s a young man had a r r i v e d a t L e i p z i g i n F a l l 1876 t o p u r s u e
l i n g u i s t i c s t u d i e s , and had no doubt a c q u a i n t e d h i m s e l f f a i r l y e a r l y
w i t h S i e v e r s ' book a s h e c e r t a i n l y d i d w i t h Die Kerenzer Mundart des
Kantons G k r u s by J o s t W i n t e l e r (1846-1929) which a l s o appeared i n 1876. 6
Judgingfrom t h e f r e q u e n t r e - e d i t i o n s of S i e v e r s ' GrundzGge t h i s book
was n o t o n l y r e g a r d e d a s r e p l a c i n g BrGckets book devoted t o t h e same
subject, b u t a s t h e l e a d i n g a u t h o r i t y on a r t i c u l a t o r y p h o n e t i c s f o r
8
a t l e a s t a generation.
Lehmann, i n h i s Reader of 1 9 t h c e n t u r y h i s t o r i c a l l i n g u i s t i c s (1967:
257) h a s s t r e s s e d t h e modernity of t h e views p u t forward by S i e v e r s w i t h
r e g a r d t o t h e d e f i n i t i o n of sounds as members of a system and t h e view
t h a t i n d i v i d u a l sounds a r e a b s t r a c t i o n s whose v a l u e i s dependent on t h e
l i n g u i s t ' s viewpoint. Sievers' i n s i s t e n c e t h a t t h e sentence is t o b e
t a k e n a s t h e minimum l i n g u i s t i c u n i t h a s been c h a r a c t e r i z e d by Lehrnann
a s p o s s i b l y t h e "most n o t a b l e " of S i e v e r s ' views; i t s h o u l d , however,
b e added t h a t t h i s s t a t e m e n t i s n o t t o b e found i n ~ i e v e r s 'GrundzGge
p r i o r t o t h e t h i r d e d i t i o n ( s . 1885:8), a f a c t which may s u g g e s t t h a t
S i e v e r s took t h i s i d e a from e l s e w h e r e , p o s s i b l y from s i m i l a r works by
Sweet from whose Handbook of 1887 h e a p p e a r s t o have adopted t h e term
'Phonetik'. It i s t o b e r e g r e t t e d t h a t Lehmann (1967:258-66) translated
i m p o r t a n t s e c t i o n s from t h e f i f t h e d i t i o n of s i e v e r s t GrundzGge (1901)
i n s t e a d of p o r t i o n s from t h e f i r s t o r t h e second e d i t i o n , s i n c e i t i s t o
b e s u s p e c t e d t h a t S i e v e r s r e v i s e d h i s views c o n s i d e r a b l y d u r i n g t h i s
l a p s e of 25 y e a r s . We s h a l l r e f e r t o S i e v e r s t e a r l i e r e d i t i o n s , i . e . ,
t h e f i r s t (1876) and t h e second (1881), i n o r d e r t o g i v e a n h i s t o r i c a l l y
more a c c u r a t e p i c t u r e of t e n e t s h e l d d u r i n g t h e c r u c i a l p e r i o d of S a u s s u r e ' s
formative years.
I n t h e p r e f a c e t o h i s GrundzGge ( 1 8 7 6 : ~ - v i i i , which should b e r e a d
t o g e t h e r w i t h t h e one t h a t W i n t e l e r w r o t e t o h i s book, 1 8 7 6 : i i i - x ) ,
S i e v e r s emphasizes t h a t each i s o l a t e d p h o n e t i c f a c t remains dead and
f r u i t l e s s and can produce c o n f u s i o n u n l e s s a s y s t e m a t i c approach i s
undertaken (pp. v i - v i i ) . S i e v e r s p l a c e s t h e physiology of sounds o r
p h o n e t i c s a s somewhere between (a) p h y s i c s , i n t h a t i t i s concerned w i t h
a c o u s t i c a n a l y s i s of i n d i v i d u a l sounds, (b) physiology, i n s o f a r a s i t
i n v e s t i g a t e s t h e f u n c t i o n s of t h e o r g a n s which become a c t i v e i n t h e
p r o d u c t i o n and p e r c e p t i o n of speech sounds, and ( c ) l i n g u i s t i c s , i n s o f a r
a s p h o n e t i c s p r o v i d e s i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t t h e n a t u r e of one of i t s i m p o r t a n t
aspects, i . e . e v e r y t h i n g which concerns t h e v o c a l p a r t of s p e e c h , t h e
combination and f u n c t i o n of sounds a s w e l l a s t h e i r e v o l u t i o n ( c f . 1 8 7 6 : l ) .
When S i e v e r s s t r e s s e s i n t h e subsequent paragraph of t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n
t h a t t h e s t u d y of i s o l a t e d sounds ( i n c o n t r a s t t o p h y s i c s and physio-
l o g y ) cannot b e an aim i n i t s e l f and t h a t p h o n e t i c s t o t h e l i n g u i s t
i s n o t h i n g b u t an a u x i l i a r y s c i e n c e , h e a p p e a r s t o have a n t i c i p a t e d
S a u s s u r e ' s view e x p r e s s e d i n 1894 ( s . CLG(E), 92) and u l t i m a t e l y i n
t h e C ~ u r s a, ~p o s i t i o n which h a s been m a i n t a i n e d by a number of Western
l i n g u i s t s u n t i l today.
But what i s more i m p o r t a n t h e r e ' i s t h e f a c t t h a t S i e v e r s s t a t e s
i n t h e n e x t s e n t e n c e (which s u r p r i s i n g l y h a s been e l i m i n a t e d i n t h e t h i r d
and subsequent e d i t i o n s of t h e GrundzGge) t h a t f o r t h e l i n g u i s t i t i s n o t
t h e i n d i v i d u a l sound b u t t h e sound systems of t h e i n d i v i d u a l l i n g u i s t i c
10
u n i t s , t h e i r r e l a t i o n and g r a d u a l displacement which a r e of v a l u e .
This emphasis on t h e i n v e s t i g a t i o n of t h e sound system i n c o n t r a s t t o t h e
i s o l a t e d speech sound i s r e p e a t e d i n t h e subsequent p a s s a g e s of t h e
i n t r o d u c t o r y s t a t e m e n t . l1 I n f a c t S i e v e r s f i n d s i t n e c e s s a r y even a t
t h i s p o i n t ( i . e . b e f o r e summing up h i s o b s e r v a t i o n s concerning i n d i v i d u a l
sounds i n 5 8 of h i s o u t l i n e ) t o s t r e s s i n t h e g e n e r a l i n t r o d u c t i o n
"most e m p h a t i c a l l y t h a t t h e t a s k s o f sound physiology cannot b e s o l v e d
by a mere s t a t i s t i c a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n of individual sounds and- t h e i r
evolutions. For i n g e n e r a l i t i s n o t t h e i n d i v i d u a l sound undergoing
change which f o l l o w s u n i v e r s a l l y v a l i d laws, b u t r a t h e r t h e r e i s u s u a l l y
a corresponding deveZopment of a corresponding series of sounds i n corres-
ponding positions ( c f . f o r example t h e uniform t r a n s f o r m a t i o n of t h e
s e r i e s of t e n u e s , mediae and a s p i r a t a e i n t h e Germanic consonant s h i f t ,
...
'

" ) e t c . (1881:3-4) .I2 I n t h e f o l l o w i n g paragraph S i e v e r s a s k s

t h e l i n g u i s t t o s e e k an e x a c t i n s i g h t i n t o t h e s t r u c t u r e of every
p h o n o l o g i c a l system of t h e language under i n v e s t i g a t i o n , p o i n t i n g o u t
t h a t one always h a s t o keep i n mind t h a t i t i s n o t s o much t h e number
of sounds by themselves t h a t i s r e l e v a n t b u t t h e i r i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p s
(l876:4).
It w i l l b e noted t h a t t h e s e o b s e r v a t i o n s a r e s t r i k i n g l y s i m i l a r ,
though f a r l e s s r i g o r o u s l y s t a t e d , t o S a u s s u r e ' s c l a i m t h a t t h e r e a r e
n o t h i n g b u t d i f f e r e n c e s i n language ( c f . CLG(E), 270), and t h a t u l t i m a t e l y
language is a system of terms which a r e d e f i n e d by mutual c o n t r a s t .
It i s n o t u n r e a s o n a b l e t o c l a i m t h a t , a l t h o u g h t h e term 'phoneme' cannot
b e found i n S i e v e r s , h i s s t a t e m e n t p o i n t s t o a phonemic p r i n c i p l e ( s i m i l a r
t o Sweet's "broad Romic" t r a n s c r i p t i o n i n 1877) which Baudouin d e Cour-
tenay and Kruszewski and a l s o W i n t e l e r developed d u r i n g roughly t h e
same time.
It a p p e a r s t h a t S i e v e r s ' o b s e r v a t i o n s played an i m p o r t a n t r h e i n
Saussure's phonological theorizing. However, i t i s somewhat d i f f i c u l t
t o g i v e a c l e a r account of t h i s m a t t e r b e c a u s e t h e n o t e s which B a l l y
made from t h r e e l e c t u r e s devoted t o t h e s y l l a b l e which S a u s s u r e gave i n
1897 ( c f . CLG, 63 [ e d . ] ) have n o t been r e c o v e r e d . I f one can r e l y on
t h e e d i t o r s ' i n d i c a t i o n (CLG 66, n.1) S a u s s u r e used t h e f i f t h e d i t i o n
of S i e v e r s ' GrundzZge when h e l e c t u r e d on p h o n e t i c p r i n c i p l e s i n h i s
c o u r s e s on g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s . 1 3 But, a s H. G. Schogt (1966:18) h a s
r e c e n t l y p o i n t e d o u t , p h o n o l o g i c a l a n a l y s i s i s probably t h e weakest
p a r t i n t h e Saussurean Cours; nor i s S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r y of t h e s y l l a b l e
a s advanced a s had been t h o u g h t , a s i s shown i n Gyula L a z i c z i u s ' Lehr-
buch d e r Phonetik.14 What we b e l i e v e t o b e t h e most i m p o r t a n t a s p e c t
of S i e v e r s ' work i n terms of t h e development of S a u s s u r e ' s l i n g u i s t i c
t h e o r y i s S i e v e r s ' f r e q u e n t emphasis on t h e importance of t h e s y s t e m a t i c
c h a r a c t e r of language, a concept which S a u s s u r e employed r i g o r o u s l y
and s o s u c c e s s f u l l y even a s e a r l y a s i n h i s ~ 6 m o i r eo f 1878 ( c f . C.
15
V a l l i n i , 1969:24), a s we have p o i n t e d o u t e a r l i e r i n t h i s c h a p t e r .
Once a g a i n , however, a s u g g e s t i o n h a s been t a k e n up by S a u s s u r e and de-
veloped t o a n e x t e n t which had n o t been thought of b e f o r e i n l i n g u i s t i c
studies. Buyssens i s c e r t a i n l y n o t c o r r e c t when h e c l a i m s t h a t s i n c e
t h e Mzmoire " l e terme syst2me 6 t a i t e n t r 6 dans l ' u s a g e " (CFS 18:21 [19611),
- f o r t h e n o t i o n o f l a n g u a g e as a n o r g a n i s m and a s a s y s t e m was f a i r l y
common t h r o u g h o u t t h e 1 9 t h c e n t u k y ( c f . Lepschy, 1970:34) -, b u t Buyssens
i s r i g h t when h e s t a t e s t h a t e a r l i e r u s e s of t h i s t e r m d i d n o t imply a
c o h e r e n t c o n c e p t o f m u t u a l l y d e f i n e d t e r m s comparable t o t h a t which
S a u s s u r e p r o p o s e d f o r i t ( c f . CLG, 1959-62).
 FOOTNOTES - 1.3.2.3

l.
Arens, 1969:316, and P u t s c h k e , 1969:19-20, t h e most r e c e n t a c c o u n t s
we a r e aware o f , c o n t r a d i c t each o t h e r on v a r i o u s p o i n t s ; Lepschy and
Waterman, b o t h of 1970, do n o t mention S i e v e r s a t a l l .

Rudolf Kiigel (1855-99) and t h e young S a u s s u r e were a s s o c i a t e d

f o r some t i m e w i t h t h e neogrammarians. P a u l , Wilhelm Braune (1850-
1926), Gustav Meyer (1850-1900), O t t o Behaghel (1854-1936), B e r t h o l d
Delbriick (1842-1922), and E r n s t Windisch (1844-1918) j o i n e d t h e Jung-
g r m a t i k e r f a i r l y e a r l y ; Wilhelm Meyer-Liibke (1861-1936), Wilhelm
S t r e i t b e r g (1864-1925), Holger Pedersen (1867-1953), and many o t h e r
l i n g u i s t s followed them towards t h e end of t h e 1 9 t h c e n t u r y . The GGttin-
gen c i r c l e around August F i c k (1833-1916), n o t a b l y A d a l b e r t Bezzenberger
(1851-1922) and Hermann C o l l i t z (l855-1935), a s w e l l a s t o a c o n s i d e r -
a b l e e x t e n t members of t h e Kazan school, followed s u i t , m e t h o d o l o g i c a l l y
a t l e a s t . Hermann Ziemer (1845-1910), a GymnasiaZZehrer a t Colberg on
t h e B a l t i c Sea, a s s o c i a t e d h i m s e l f r a t h e r e a r l y w i t h t h e neogrammarian
movement ( c f . Brugmann, LC 33:402 [1882]).

%er den EinfZuss der gennanischen Sprachen auf d i e Finnisch-

Lappischen ( H a l l e , S.: Buchhandlung d e s Waisenhauses, 1870); r e p r . ,
w i t h an i n t r o d u c t i o n by T. A. Sebeak, under t h e E. ( ! ) t i t l e On t h e
Influence of Germanic Languages on Finnic and Lapp ( ~ l o o m i n g t o n : I n d i a n a
Univ. P r e s s , l 9 6 7 ) , 188 pp.
4 The importance of S i e v e r s ' GrundzCge f o r Brugmann's f i n d i n g s
i n 1876 i s p a r a l l e l e d by t h e s u p p o r t which J o s t W i n t e l e r ' s monograph
of t h e same y e a r was t o Osthoff and Brugmann's p o s t u l a t e of e x c e p t i o n -
l e s s sound laws i n t h e i r MorphoZogische Untersuchungen of 1878. Winte-
l e r ' s s y n c h r o n i c d e s c r i p t i o n of a Swiss-German d i a l e c t p r o v i d e d t h e
s t r o n g e s t e v i d e n c e a v a i l a b l e t o t h e s e two 'Young ~ u r k s ' f o r t h e i r c l a i m .

For p e r t i n e n t i n f o r m a t i o n , s . D i e t r i c h Germann's a c c o u n t s , "Die

Berufung von Eduard S i e v e r s a l s a u s s e r o r d e n t l i c h e n P r o f e s s o r d e r d e u t -
schen P i l o l o g i e nach J e n a (1871)11, WZUJ 5:699-701 (1955/56), and "Eduard*
S i e v e r s und d i e Griindung d e s O r d i n a r i a t s fiir d e u t s c h e P h i l o g i e an d e r
U n i v e r s i t z t J e n a 1876", WissenschaftZiche AnnaZen ( B e r l i n ) 6:485-93
(1957). For a d e t a i l e d account of S i e v e r s s . Theodor F r i n g s ' o b i t u a r y ,
II
Eduard S i e v e r s " , BVSAW 85.1: 1[ 3 ] -56 ( l 9 3 3 ) , followed by a b i b l i o g r a p h y
of S i e v e r s ' w r i t i n g s , i b i d . , 57-92, comp. by E l i s a b e t h ~arg-~asterstzdt .
S i e v e r s was a p r o f e s s o r a t J e n a (1871-83), Tiibingen (1883-7), H a l l e
(1887-92) , and f i n a l l y L e i p z i g (1892-1932) .
 ,
I t h a s been e s t a b l i s h e d ( c f . De Mauro, 1968:361) t h a t FdS owned
t h e 2nd ed. of S i e v e r s ' GrundzQge (1881) a s w e l l a s W i n t e l e r ' s d i a l e c t
s t u d y . I t i s perhaps worth n o t i n g t h a t S i e v e r s and W i n t e l e r worked
t o g e t h e r v e r y c l o s e l y ; c f . S i e v e r s ( 1 8 7 6 : v i ) , and W i n t e l e r ( 1 8 7 6 : ~ )
who mentions ~ e l b r k k ' st e a c h i n g s a s w e l l which h e followed a t J e n a .

S. E r n s t Wilhelm R i t t e r von Briicke (1819-92), Grundziige der

PhysioZogieund Systematik der SprachZaute fiir Linguisten und Taubstum-
menZehrer (Vienna: C. G e r o l d ' s Sohn, 1856); 2nd r e v . e d . , i b i d . , 1876.
It s h o u l d b e added however t h a t S i e v e r s (1876:vi) favoured much C a r l
Ludwig Merkel's (1812-76) book, Anatomie und PhysioZogie des mensch-
Zichen S t i m - und Sprachorgans ( L e i p z i g : Abel, 1 8 5 7 ) , x x i v + 976 pp.

Grundziige der Lautphysiologie zur Einfiihrung i n das Studiwn der

indogermanischen Sprachen ( L e i p z i g : B r e i t k o p f & H z r t e l , 1876), x + 150
pp. ; 2nd r e v . & e n l . e d . , which a l s o r e p l a c e s "Lautphysiologie" by "Phone-
t i k " , ibid., 1881, x v + 224 pp.; 3rd e d . , 1885; x v i + 255 pp.; 5 t h e d . ,
1901, 328 pp.

Cf. CLG, 56 i n which FdS s t a t e d e m p h a t i c a l l y t h a t p h o n e t i c s i s

n o t h i n g b u t "une d i s c i p l i n e a u x i l i a i r e " and i s concerned w i t h paroze,
t h e i n d i v i d u a l speech a c t o n l y and n o t w i t h Zangue, t h e system of meaning-
f u l v o c a l s i g n s ( c f . a l s o CLG, 37, and CLG(E), 91-2). It s h o u l d b e
n o t e d t h a t FdS used t h e terms "phonologie" and "phonetics" (CLG, 55-7)
i n t h e r e v e r s e s e n s e of modern usage, b u t which was s t i l l m a i n t a i n e d by
Maurice Grammont i n h i s ~ r a i t 6de phon6tique ( P a r i s : Delagrave, 1933;
4 t h r e v . e d . , 1950). ..
10
The p a s s a g e , which i s i d e n t i c a l i n t h e 2nd ed. of 1881, r u n s a s
f o l l o w s : "Fiir i h n [ i . e . t h e l i n g u i s t ] h a t n i c h t d e r e i n z e l n e Laut e i n e n
Werth, s o n d e r n d i e Lautsysteme d e r e i n z e l n e n S p r a c h e i n h e i t e n , d e r e n
V e r h z l t n i s zu e i n a n d e r und i h r e a l l m 2 h l i c h e Verschiebung." (1876 =
1 8 8 1 : ) One should remember t h a t S i e v e r s ' book was w r i t t e n f o r t h e
u s e of t h e h i s t o r i c a l l i n g u i s t a s i t s s u b t i t l e ( c f . n.8) i n d i c a t e s .

l1 Cf. t h e f r e q u e n t u s e of "Lautsystem" (1876: 2, 3 [ t h r e e t i m e s ! 1 ,

4, and 5 ) ; " S c h r i f t s y s t e m " (l876:2) ; "Systemtt (p. 4 , [ t w i c e ] ) .

l2We q u o t e from t h e 2nd ed. h e r e (which was owned by FdS) b e c a u s e

t h i s s t a t e m e n t h a s been made somewhat more e x p l i c i t t h a n i n t h e 1st ed.
( c f . 1876:3-4). I t is i n t e r e s t i n g t o n o t e t h a t t h e term " ~ a u t p h y s i o l o g i e "
i n t h e 1st ed. (which was r e p l a c e d by "Phonetik" i n t h e 2nd ed.) h a s been
r e p l a c e d by " h i s t o r i s c h e Phonetik" i n t h e 3rd and subsequent e d i t i o n s
i n t h i s s p e c i f i c c o n t e x t ( c f . GrundzQge, 3rd ed., 1885: 6) .We a r e u n a b l e
t o d e t e r m i n e whether S i e v e r s , l i k e Brugmann, meant t o s a y " s t a t i s c h "
when h e w r o t e " s t a t i s t i s c h " . Cf. however Lieb, 1967: 22, and n o t e 11.

l3 According t o t h e same n o t e (CLG, 66) O t t o J e s p e r s e n ' s Lehrbuch

der Phonetik ( L e i p z i g : B . G. Teubner, 1904), 2nd ed., 1913, and ~ 6 o n c e
R o u d e t ' s EZdments de phondtique gdndraZe ( P a r i s : H . W e l t e r , 1910) were
b o t h c o n s u l t e d a s w e l l . I n f a c t t h e e d i t o r s (CLG, 66-7, n.2) acknow-
l e d g e t h a t t h e y f i l l e d i n t h e gaps i n t h e n o t e s w i t h t h e h e l p of J e s p e r s e n ' s
book. A comparison between t h e Cours of 1916 and t h e c r i t i c a l ed. r e v e a l s
t h a t ( a t l e a s t a s f a r a s t h e s t u d e n t s t n o t e s of 1907-11 are-concerned)
S i e v e r s was n o t mentioned on t h o s e o c c a s i o n s where t h e CLG s u g g e s t s i t ;
c f . CLG, 88 a s a g a i n s t CLG(E), 139 o r CLG, 94 a s a g a i n s t CLG(E), 145,
a l t h o u g h i n t h i s c a s e t h e p a s s a g e r e f e r r e d t o can e a s i l y b e t r a c e d t o
S i e v e r s ' GrundxEge (1876:27). A s f o r CLG, 92 and CLG(E), 144, where
s y l l a b i c v s . n o n - s y l l a b i c sounds a r e d i s c u s s e d , t h e s t u d e n t s ' n o t e s
mention Brugrnann ( c f . h i s " N a s a l i s sonans" of 1876 which c e r t a i n l y owes
some i n s i g h t s t o S i e v e r s ) b u t n o t S i e v e r s , a l t h o u g h t h i s may n o t b e v e r y
i m p o r t a n t h e r e , s i n c e b o t h d e a l t w i t h t h i s problem a t l e n g t h ( c f . S i e v e r s ,
1876: 25-8, 55-7) .
l4 B e r l i n : Akad. Verlag, 1961; c f . e s p . t h e chap., "Geschichte
.
d e r S i l b e n f r a g e " , 156-93,. i n p a r t i c u l a r pp 174-6.

l5 Cf. a l s o t h e chap., "Vom Lautwandel", i n S i e v e r s ' Grundziige

(1876: l 2 4 f f .) i n which S i e v e r s n o t e s t h e p o s s i b i l i t y of " v o l l s t ~ n d i g e
Verschiebungen g a n z e r Lautsysteme" ( p . 127) and t h a t spontaneous pho-
n e t i c change (by c o n t r a s t w i t h t h o s e changes which a r e dependent on t h e
p h o n e t i c environment) e f f e c t s " b e l i e b i g e S y s t e m t h e i l e ohne Riicksicht
auf i h r e Lautumgebung" ( p . 128) .
1.3.3 Baudouin d e Courtenay, Kruszewski, and T h e i r I d e a s a b o u t I

Language Study i n ~ e n e r a and

l T h e i r T h e o r i e s of P h o n o l o g i c a l
Analysis i n P a r t i c u l a r

Ce ne sont pas Zes Zinguistes comrne Fried-

r i c h MiiZZer, de 2 ' ~ n i v e r s i t Gde Vienne, qui
embrassent h peu pre's tous Zes idiomes du
globe, qui on jamais f a i t faire un pas h
Za connaissance du Zungage; mais Zes noms
qu'on a w a i t h c i t e r duns ce sens seraient
Zes noms de romanistes come M . Gaston Paris,
M . Paul Meyer e t M . Schuchardt, des noms
de germanistes come M. Hermann Paul, des
noms de Z 'GcoZe russe s'occupant spGciaZe-
ment de russe e t de slave, c o m e M . N .
Baudouin de Courtenay e t M . Kruszewski.
F. d e S a u s s u r e i n 1891 (CFS 12:66)

1.3.3.1 S a u s s u r e ' s Acquaintance w i t h t h e Work o f t h e 'Kazan

S c h o o l ' , and t h e Importance o f H i s E a r l i e r Work on
Baudouin de Courtenay and Kruszewski

V. V. Vinogradov, a n a d h e r e n t of t h e ' P e t e r s b u r g S c h o o l ' founded

by J a n Baudouin d e Courtenay (1845-1929) a t t h e t u r n of t h i s c e n t u r y ,
p o i n t e d o u t i n 1962 t h a t " t h e c o n v i c t i o n i s s p r e a d i n g and becoming s t r o n g e r
t h a t F. d e S a u s s u r e was a c q u a i n t e d w i t h t h e works of Baudouin d e Courtenay
and n o t f r e e of Baudouin's t h e o r i e s when working on h i s Cows de Zinguis-
tique g8nkmZe."1 This s t i l l r a t h e r unspecified statement has s i n c e
been s u b s t a n t i a t e d a t l e a s t a s f a r a s e x t r a - l i n g u i s t i c m a t t e r s a r e con-
cerned. I n 1963, N a t a l i j a A. S l j u s a r e v a drew a t t e n t i o n t o t h e e x i s t e n c e
of a l e t t e r from S a u s s u r e a d d r e s s e d t o Baudouin i n October 1889 i n which
t h e young A s s i s t a n t S e c r e t a r y of t h e Socigtk de Linguistique de Paris
2
r e f e r r e d t o t h e i r meeting seven y e a r s e a r l i e r , and i n 1964 E. B e n v e n i s t e
e s t a b l i s h e d ( w i t h t h e h e l p of t h e annual Bulletin of t h e S o c i e t y ) t h e
f a c t t h a t t h e s e two l i n g u i s t ; had met on t h e o c c a s i o n of s e v e r a l s e s s i o n s
of t h i s S o c i e t y h e l d i n P a r i s i n December 1881, January 1882, and prob-
I3
a b l y t w i c e more i n t h e same y e a r .
I n a d d i t i o n t o t h e s e i n d i c a t i o n s two i n s t a n c e s have r e c e n t l y been
made a v a i l a b l e t o t h e g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c p u b l i c when some of S a u s s u r e ' s
unpublished m a n u s c r i p t s were p r i n t e d i n which Baudouin d e Courtenay and
h i s p u p i l Mikokaj Kruszewski a r e mentioned. The one r e f e r e n c e i s con-
t a i n e d i n S a u s s u r e ' s f i r s t l e c t u r e s h e l d a t t h e U n i v e r s i t y of Geneva
i n November 1891, i n which S a u s s u r e s i n g l e s o u t t h e s e two l i n g u i s t s ,
t o g e t h e r w i t h a number of o t h e r Western s c h o l a r s , a s t h o s e who had p u t
forward i d e a s concerned w i t h g e n e r a l problems of language s t u d y . The
o t h e r e x p l i c i t mention of t h e s e two l i n g u i s t s which S a u s s u r e made on
t h e o c c a s i o n of h i s ( n e v e r completed) review of A. Sechehaye's Programme
e t m5thodes o f 1908 i s more s p e c i f i c and s h o u l d b e quoted i n f u l l s i n c e
t h e s t a t e m e n t c h a r a c t e r i z e s a p t l y S a u s s u r e ' s a t t i t u d e towards t h e i r
achievements. I n t h i s n o t e , S a u s s u r e s t a t e s t h a t u n d e r t a k i n g s of a kind
s i m i l a r t o Sechehaye's a t t e m p t e d p r e v i o u s l y by Humboldt, P a u l and Wundt
had been q u i t e u n s u c c e s s f u l ( t h e y had mainly provided m a t e r i a l ) , but
h e goes on t o observe:

Baudouin d e Courtenay e t Kruszewski o n t 6t6 p l u s p r z s que

personne d ' u n e vue t h g o r i q u e d e l a langue, c e l a s a n s s o r t i r
des consid6rations l i n g u i s t i q u e s pures; i l s s o n t d ' a i l l e u r s
i g n o r g s d e l a g 6 n 6 r a l i t 6 d e s s a v a n t s o c c i d e n t a u x . (SM, 5 1 ) .

We b e l i e v e t h a t we can draw t h e f o l l o w i n g hypotheses from t h e above

information: 1 ) S a u s s u r e had been a c q u a i n t e d w i t h t h e work of b o t h
Baudouin and Kruszewski s i n c e 1881; 2) h e regarded t h e i r w r i t i n g s a s
a t t e m p t s a t a g e n e r a l view of language, b u t 3) noted a t t h e same t i m e
t h a t t h e y had n o t been t o t a l l y s u c c e s s f u l i n t h e i r endeavours, and
finally 4 ) t h a t t h e y had been i g n o r e d by most w e s t e r n s c h o l a r s of h i s
time. The f i r s t two a s s e r t i o n s can b e q u i t e e a s i l y s u b s t a n t i a t e d ; Baudouin
h i m s e l f p r e s e n t e d a number of h i s and Kruszewski's p u b l i c a t i o n s which
had appeared d u r i n g t h e y e a r s 1879 and 1881 i n Kazan and Warsaw t o t h e
5
L i n g u i s t i c S o c i e t y of P a r i s d u r i n g h i s v i s i t , and S a u s s u r e n o t only
a t t e n d e d some of t h e s e meetings when Baudouin handed them o v e r , b u t
a p p e a r s t o have had t h e f u n c t i o n of c a t a l o g u i n g them f o r t h e L i b r a r y
of t h e S o c i e t y , s i n c e most s e c r e t a r i a l work was done by S a u s s u r e .
6
I

A s f o r t h e f o u r t h o b s e r v a t i o n , t h e r e i s no s a t i s f a c t o r y e v i d e n c e
, ~u t i t i s t h e t h i r d t h a t w i l l have t o b e t h e main
t o the ~ o n t r a r y b
s u b j e c t of t h i s c h a p t e r , s i n c e i t i s t h e t o p i c of t h i s p a r t of t h e s t u d y
t o i n v e s t i g a t e t h e p o t e n t i a l s o u r c e s of S a u s s u r e ' s l i n g u i s t i c i n s p i r a t i o n .
However, f o r t h e s a k e of h i s t o r i c a l j u s t i c e , we should f i r s t r e p o r t
t h e e x t e n t t o which S a u s s u r e f o r h i s p a r t had a n impact on t h e s e two
Polish linguists. Although Baudouin a p p e a r s t o have been aware, a s e a r l y
a s i n 1868, of t h e f a c t t h a t sound f e a t u r e s were employed t o d i s t i n g u i s h
8
meanings ( c f . ~ v i E , 1965:133; H z u s l e r , 1968:91-2), i t was n o t b e f o r e
1881 t h a t h i s w r i t i n g s c o n t a i n e d t h e term 'fonema' (phoneme) t o d e n o t e
t h e i n d i v i d u a l a b s t r a c t sound u n i t ( c f . GraurIWald, 1965:77), and i n
f a c t i t was Kruszewskiwho s u g g e s t e d t h e u s e of t h i s term i n c o n t r a s t
t o 'sound' the acoustic-articulatory ("anthropophonic") u n i t , a s Baudouin
9
h i m s e l f a t t e s t e d on s e v e r a l o c c a s i o n s .
I n 1880 Kruszewski had reviewed Brugmann's " N a s a l i s sonans" (1876)
t o g e t h e r w i t h ~ a u s s u r 's
e M&oire (1878) ,lo and spoke v e r y e n t h u s i a s t i c a l l y
of t h e l a t t e r ' s accomplishments. S a u s s u r e employed t h e term 'phonsme'
about f o r t y o r f i f t y times i n h i s ~ 6 m o i r e( c f . pp. 2, 5 [ b i s ] , 6 [ b i s ] ,
7, e t c . ) , and a l s o o t h e r terms which Kruszewski and Baudouin a p p e a r
t o have adopted from S a u s s u r e ' s monograph, e . g . 'zgro' (1943, 217),
'alternance' (12, and e l s e w h e r e ) , probably ' s o n a n t e ' ( a l t h o u g h SM, 276
and LTS, 47 do n o t mention i t ) , and p o s s i b l y a l s o t h e n o t i o n of system
(which S a u s s u r e used i n t h e t i t l e of h i s work and a s a p r i n c i p l e under-
lying h i s investigations)
11
.
 FOOTNOTES - 1.3.3.1

See h i s paper, "Jan Baudouin d e Courtenay", Slavia O r i e n t a l i s

11:447-60 (1962), w r i t t e n i n P o l . , a t p . 453; a Russ. t r a n s l . of t h i s
a r t i c l e , "I. A. Bodusn d e ~ u r t e n s " , appeared i n BdC, 1963, I , 6-20.
2
See h e r i n f o r m a t i v e s u r v e y of "Saussurism" i n Russian l i n g u i s t i c s ,
1I Quelques c o n s i d & - a t i o n s d e s l i n g u i s t e s s o v i 6 t i q u e s 2 propos d e s i d g e s

d e F. d e Saussure", CFS 20:23-46 (1962) a t p. 28, n o t e 9 . N. A . S l j u -

s a r e v a ' s p a p e r , "Mesto F. d e S o s s j u a v . r a z v i t i i sovremennoj l i n g v i s -
t i k i " , was u n f o r t u n a t e l y n o t r e a d on t h e o c c a s i o n of t h e 1 0 t h I n t e r -
n a t i o n a l Congress of L i n g u i s t s i n B u c h a r e s t a s planned. See t h e i n t e r -
e s t i n g summary i n RC[IO]CIL, p. 342 (1967).

See t h e n o t e , "Saussure et Baudouin d e Courtenay", CFS 21:129-30

(1964). I n f a c t BdC was e l e c t e d a s a member of t h e S o c i e t y on December
.
3 r d , 1881 i n FdS 's p r e s e n c e ( c f BSLP 4.21: l i i ) .
See t h e "Notes i n g d i t e s d e F ~ S " , CFS 12: 49-71 (1954), a t p . 66
( c f . t h e motto t o s e c t i o n 1 . 3 . 3 ) . For t h e e x a c t d a t e of t h e m a n u s c r i p t ,
s . SM, 36 (N 1 ) .
Vol. 4, No. 21 of BSLP l i s t s , among o t h e r s , Kruszewski's K Voprosu
q gune ( x x i x ) , t h e G. v e r s i o n of t h e t h e o r e t i c a l p a r t of t h i s monograph,
l&er d i e Lautabwechslung ( l i ; b o t h had appeared i n l 8 8 l ) , and t h e same
a u t h o r ' s " ~ i n ~ v i s t i z e s k izametki"
e of 1880 (xxxv); i t a l s o l i s t s ~ a u d o u i n ' s
Nekotorye o t d e Zy ' s r a v n i t e l 'no j grummatiki ' s Zavjanskix j a z y kov (Warsaw :
M. ~emkevi;) , 82 pp. ( l i i ) .
6
~ a u s s u r e ' s c o l l e a g u e L. Havet w r o t e a review of Kruszewski's
%er die Lautabwechs l u n g which appeared i n RCHL 12.42 :278-9 (1881) , i n
which h e c r i t i c i z e d Kruszewski f o r t r e a t i n g language development a s
lI
un d e v e n i r rigoureusement c o n t i n u " ( 2 7 9 ) , b u t p r a i s e d him f o r h i s
a n a l y s i s of t h e phonemes (!) of R u s s i a n .

T h i s i s p a r t i c u l a r l y t r u e f o r BdC's w r i t i n g s of h i s Kazan p e r i o d
(1875-83) of which we have been u n a b l e t o t r a c e a s i n g l e review; by
c o n t r a s t , Kruszewski's p u b l i c a t i o n s of t h e same t i m e have r e c e i v e d some
a t t e n t i o n a t l e a s t . Aleksander B r k k n e r (1856-1939) c r i t i c i z e d h i s K
Voprosu o gune s e v e r e l y i n ASP 5:685-6 (1881); ( c f . Kruszewski's r e p l y ,
"Otvet g . ~rcckner'u:, RFV 7: 135-9 [1882]) . V a t r o s l a v ~ a ~ (1838-
i 6
1923) reviewed h i s Ocerk n a u k i o jaxyke (Kazan 1883) i n ASP 7:480-2,
a s t u d y which Schuchardt quoted on o c c a s i o n i n h i s famous m e r d i e
L a u t g e s e t z e ( B e r l i n : Oppenheim, 1885), v , 5, 3 1 (= Hugo Schuchardt-
Brevier, 45, 70) . Brugmann w r o t e a s h o r t review of %er die Lautab-
wechsZung (Kazan 1881) i n LC 32,, c o l l . 400-1 (1882). H . P a u l t o o k n o t e
o f t h e G. t r a n s l . of Kruszewski's 1883 monograph, Prinzipien der Sprach-
entuicklung (which appeared i n i n s t a l m e n t s i n v o l s . 1-3 and 5 of IZAS
[1884-901) i n t h e 4 t h ed. of h i s Prinzipien (1909), x i v , 49, n.1, 189,
n.1, p e r h a p s b e c a u s e h e could f i n d s u p p o r t f o r h i s own assumptions i n
Kruszewski's o u t l i n e which i n f a c t had been conceived of under t h e s t r o n g
i n f l u e n c e of t h e f i r s t e d i t i o n (1880) of P a u l ' s book.

S. BdC's n o t e , ''Wechsel d e s s , s') m i t ch i n d e r p o l n i s c h e n

Sprache", BVSpr 6 :221-2 (18681 [ 1870 1)

.
Cf RFV 5: 339 (1881) , and a l s o BdC's Versuch einer !l'heorie pho-
netischer Alternationen ( S t r a s s b u r g : K. J . Triibner, 1895), p. 7 , n . 1,
where h e s t a t e s e x p l i c i t l y : "Der Vorschlag, den Namen Phonem, i m Unter-
s c h i e d e von k u t , zu gebrauchen, r i i h r t von Kruszewski h e r ."
10
" ~ o v e j g i j ao t k r y t i j a v . o b l a s t i ario-evropejskogo vokalizma",
RFV 4:33-45 (1880). It i s t h e r e f o r e s u r p r i s i n g t o n o t e t h a t Godel
(SM, 272) m a i n t a i n s t h a t BdC had c r e a t e d t h e term phoneme i n d e p e n d e n t l y
from t h e French p h o n e t i c i a n A. Dufriche-Desgenettes who s u g g e s t e d
'phonsme' t o r e p l a c e t h e somewhat awkward e x p r e s s i o n 'son du l a n g a g e '
i n 1873 ( c f . SM, 1 6 0 ) . L.Havet began t o u s e t h i s term from 1876 on,
and FdS adopted i t from him ( c f . vie, 1965:132, n.15).

'' The most handy p u b l i c a t i o n by a member of t h e Kazan,.school which

w e may u s e t o t r a c e t h e s e terms a p p e a r s t o b e ~ r u s z e w s k i ' s Uber die
Lautahwechslung of 1881 ( a n E n g l i s h t r a n s l a t i o n of which p r e p a r e d by
Robert A u s t e r l i t z i s t o b e p u b l i s h e d s o o n ) . K , u s e s t h e e x p r e s s i o n
' N u l l ' t w i c e ( 7 , 9) and a s a mathematical s i g n :0' (35), t h e expressions
'System' ( e . g . 24) and 'Abwechslung' f o r Russ. ceredovanie " a l t e r n a t i o n "
( e . g . 7) throughout h i s t r e a t i s e , and a l s o 'Sonante' [ s i c ] ( 9 ) . For t h e
term 'Phonem', s. i b i d . , n o t e 1 (14-5).
1.3.3.2 J . Baudouin de Courtenay and H i s I d e a s c o n c e r n i n g t h e
I n v e s t i g a t i o n o f Language

The term "phoneme" h a s proved t o b e p a r t i c u l a r l y s u c c e s s f u l i n

l i n g u i s t i c s , and Baudouin a s w e l l a s Kruszewski had a n i m p o r t a n t s h a r e
i n t h i s development. Henry G. Schogt h a s s t a t e d t h a t Baudouin's "most
o u t s t a n d i n g c o n t r i b u t i o n t o t h e development of modern t h e o r i e s i s t h e
1
i n t r o d u c t i o n of a n a b s t r a c t sound-unit" i n t o l i n g u i s t i c s t u d i e s .
Baudouin had i n f a c t observed, a s e s r l y a s 1881, t h a t "we ought t o
generalize t h e 'divergenty' [ i . e . p h o n e t i c m a n i f e s t a t i o n s of one and t h e
same d i s t i n c t i v e phonematic element] i n t o 'fonemy' [ i . e . phonologically-
conditioned a l t e r n a t i o n s ] . The n e c e s s i t y may t h e n a r i s e t h a t c e r t a i n
'fonemy' b e g e n e r a l i z e d i n t o more g e n e r a l 'fonemy' - 'fonemy' of a h i g h e r
order." (REV 5.3:336). Schogt a l s o c o n s i d e r s t h e works of Baudouin
and S a u s s u r e t o b e complementary w i t h r e g a r d t o t h e i r a n t i c i p a t i o n of
modern s t r u c t u r a l l i n g u i s t i c s , p o i n t i n g o u t t h a t p h o n o l o g i c a l a n a l y s i s ,
which h e r e g a r d s a s t h e weakest p a r t of t h e C o w s , i s p r e c i s e l y t h e
a r e a i n which Baudouin e x c e l s . 2 We b e l i e v e t h a t t h i s i s n o t t h e only
a s p e c t i n which t h e two l i n g u i s t s complement each o t h e r o r d e v i a t e
clearly i n their interests. Baudouin was a p u p i l of S c h l e i c h e r a t J e n a
U n i v e r s i t y i n 1867168. S c h l e i c h e r was h i m s e l f a n a r d e n t f i e l d worker,
emphasizing t h e v a l u e of t h e s t u d y of l i v i n g languages ( c f . D i e t z e ,
1966:31-2, 5 4 ) ; Baudouin t o o was g e n e r a l l y s p e a k i n g d a t a - o r i e n t a t e d and,
a l t h o u g h h e d i d n o t completely n e g l e c t h i s t o r i c a l l i n g u i s t i c s , 3 h e p r e s e n t e d
a s t u d y on d i a l e c t s of I t a l i a n Slovenes f o r h i s Russian d o c t o r a l d i s s e r -
t a t i o n i n 1 8 7 5 . ~ He had i n v e s t i g a t e d t h i s s u b j e c t d u r i n g t h e p r e c e d i n g
y e a r , and d u r i n g h i s l i f e t i m e h e accumulated v a s t amounts of d a t a on
S l a v o n i c d i a l e c t s , a s h e r e p o r t e d h i m s e l f i n 1929 .5 It i s t h e r e f o r e
n o t s u r p r i s i n g t h a t even Baudouin's most g i f t e d p u p i l , who had r e c e i v e d
a f o r m a l e d u c a t i o n i n philosophy, p a r t i c u l a r l y l o g i c , and i n psychology
a t Warsaw U n i v e r s i t y b e f o r e j o i n i n g Baudouin a t Kazan i n 1878 t o s p e c i a l i z e
i n l i n g u i s t i c s , emphasizes minute p h o n e t i c a n a l y s i s ("microskopische
Forschungen") i n t h e d e t e r m i n a t i o n of phenomena of l i n g u i s t i c change
i n h i s 1881 p u b l i c a t i o n . 6 StanisYaw Szober (1871-1938), a l a t e r pupil
of Baudouin, r e p o r t s i n h i s o b i t h a r y t h a t t h e work of Heymann S t e i n t h a l
(1823-99) had made a deep i m p r e s s i o n on ~ a u d o u i n , and H z u s l e r b e l i e v e s
t h a t a number of Baudouin's t h e s e s a b o u t t h e n a t u r e of language c a n b e
t r a c e d t o ~ t e i n t h a l ' sEinZeitung i n die PsychoZogie und Sprachwissenschaft
( B e r l i n : Diimrnler, 1871), i n p a r t i c u l a r h i s assumption t h a t language i s
always reproduced from t h e human s o u l i n which i t h a s i t s o r i g i n , and a
8
number of f u r t h e r p s y c h o l o g i c a l views (1968:34, and 135, n.83-4).
T h i s emphasis on t h e p s y c h o l o g i c a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of l i n g u i s t i c f a c t s
c a n a l r e a d y b e observed i n Baudouin's L e i p z i g d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n of
1868 which d e a l s w i t h what was t o become one of t h e main p i l l a r s of t h e
9
neogrammarian d o c t r i n e almost a decade l a t e r : analogy.
I n f a c t , o n l y t h e language of t h e i n d i v i d u a l was r e g a r d e d by Baudouin
10
(as by P a u l and t h e neogrammarians) a s having a p s y c h i c e x i s t e n c e .
I n 1903 Baudouin d e f i n e d language i n t h e f o l l o w i n g manner: "Language
does n o t e x i s t e x c e p t i n t h e b r a i n s of i n d i v i d u a l s , i n t h e i r s o u l s , and
i n t h e psyche of i n d i v i d u a l s o r i n d i v i d u a l p e r s o n s who form a g i v e n
language community.'' (Cf. BdC, 1963 11, 7 1 ) . T h i s does n o t mean t h a t
Baudouin denied t h e s o c i a l a s p e c t of language, b u t h e s u b o r d i n a t e d t h e
s o c i a l s i d e t o t h e psychological. H z u s l e r shows t h a t Baudouin was aware
of t h e f a c t t h a t l i n g u i s t i c communication was o n l y p o s s i b l e owing t o t h e
e x i s t e n c e of a speech community t o which h e a t t r i b u t e d t h e p h y s i c a l
( o r e x t e r n a l ) a s p e c t of language (1968:36-7). A s e a r l y a s i n 1889 Baudouin
had i n t r o d u c e d t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between s p e a k i n g (govorenie) and l a n g u a g e
( r e ; ' ) which a p p e a r s t o have a n t i c i p a t e d i n some way ~ a u s s u r e ' sl a t e r
Zangue/paroZe d i s t i n c t i o n (BdC, 1963 I , 212). However, Baudouin s e t up
t h i s dichotomy i n view of h i s d i s t i n c t i o n between ' a n t h r o p o p h o n i c s ' ,
i.e. t h e f i e l d of a c o u s t i c and a r t i c u l a t o r y p h o n e t i c s (which h e r e g a r d e d
a s an a u x i l i a r y s c i e n c e t o l i n g u i s t i c s p r o p e r a s d i d S i e v e r s and o t h e r s ) ,
and ' p s y c h o p h o n e t i c s ' , i.e. t h e a n a l y s i s of t h e p s y c h i c i m p r e s s i o n s l e f t
by t h e a c t u a l speech-sounds i n t h e minds of b o t h t h e h e a r e r and t h e s p e a k e r ,
s i n c e h i s main concern was w i t h what could t e n a t i v e l y b e c a l l e d parole
and n o t language a s a s o c i a l f a c t o r a system of i n t e r d e p e n d e n t elements
/

of l i n g u i s t i c o r g a n i z a t i o n . ~ a u d o u i n ' ss t a t e m e n t s concerning t h e n a t u r e
 Y

of language have l e d A . S. Cikobava t o o b s e r v e t h a t "Baudouin's psycho-

logism i s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h h i s s d c i o l o g i s m , h i s r e c o g n i t i o n of t h e s o c i a l
a s p e c t of language, and n o t l e s s d e f i n i t e l y t h a n i n Ferdinand d e Saussure."
(1959:87).
Such a s t a t e m e n t , however, i s q u i t e m i s l e a d i n g , s i n c e i t s u g g e s t s
t h a t t h e l i n g u i s t i c c o n c e p t s of Baudouin and S a u s s u r e w e r e q u i t e s i m i l a r
(because they employ t h e same t e r m s ) , whereas i n f a c t they d e v i a t e sub-
stantially. We have s a i d e a r l i e r t h a t Baudouin and S a u s s u r e ' s i d e a s
a b o u t language a r e complementary, and we b e l i e v e we can s u b s t a n t i a t e t h i s
claim: Baudouin n o t only emphasized t h e importance of t h e spoken and
l i v i n g languages a s a g a i n s t t h e t r a d i t i o n a l dead o r w r i t t e n l a n g u a g e s ,
b u t a l s o p r a c t i c e d h i s views by c o l l e c t i n g l i n g u i s t i c d a t a i n v a r i o u s
p l a c e s i n Europe. He s t r e s s e d t h e importance of minute p h o n e t i c a n a l y s i s
and, d e s p i t e p s y c h o l o g i c a l o v e r t o n e s i n h i s o f t e n somewhat d i f f u s e t h e -
o r i z i n g , h i s p h o n o l o g i c a l d e s c r i p t i o n s were e s s e n t i a l l y sound ( c f . H z u s l e r ,
1968:41-4; Schogt, 1966:19-29). It was p a r t i c u l a r l y i n t h e f i e l d of
p h o n o l o g i c a l a n a l y s i s t h a t Baudouin was g e n e r a l l y recognized a s an inno-
vator. Schogt (1966:29) i s i n e r r o r however i f h e b e l i e v e s t h a t Baudouin
"was indeed t h e f i r s t s c h o l a r t o i n c o r p o r a t e t h e s t u d y of sound i n t h e realm
of t h e ' l a n g u e ' (used i n o p p o s i t i o n t o ' p a r o l e ' ) ." I n f a c t t h e r e i s no
i n d i c a t i o n t h a t Baudouin e v e r conceived of language a s a system i n t h e
manner i n which S a u s s u r e f o r m u l a t e d i t ( c f . ~ i u s l e r ,1968: 40) ; h i s main
concern was never w i t h t h e s o c i a l , b u t w i t h t h e i n d i v i d u a l and psycho-
l o g i c a l a s p e c t of language, i n c o n t r a s t t o S a u s s u r e who never developed
a l i n g u i s t i c s of parole, a l t h o u g h h e conceded i t s p o s s i b i l i t y ( c f . CLG,
3 8 ) , b u t emphasized t h a t l i n g u i s t i c s p r o p e r was concerned w i t h langue
e x c l u s i v e l y (CLG, 39) .
For S a u s s u r e , t h e i n d i v i d u a l speech a c t was of no p a r t i c u l a r i n t e r e s t ,
s i n c e i t was n o t h i n g b u t t h e e x e c u t i o n of what was embedded i n t h e l i n -
g u i s t i c code ( c f . SM, 261; CLG, 34, 3 6 ) .
T h i s does n o t mean t h a t S a u s s u r e n e v e r made an a c c u r a t e p h o n e t i c
a n a l y s i s , comparable t o one by Baudouin; on t h e c o n t r a r y , h i s o b s e r -
v a t i o n s about L i t h u a n i a n a c c e,n t u a t i o n which h e p u b l i s h e d i n 1894 and 1896
11
have been regarded a s e s s e n t i a l l y c o r r e c t . But t h e s e i n v e s t i g a t i o n s
were s u r e l y m a r g i n a l i n S a u s s u r e ' s work; h i s g e n e r a l o r i e n t a t i o n towards
,
t h e o r y p l a c e d p r a c t i c a l l i n g u i s t i c a n a l y s i s on t h e p e r i p h e r y of h i s
interests. I n comparing Baudouin's c o n c e p t i o n s of t h e s o c i a l and i n -
d i v i d u a l a s p e c t s of language w i t h t h o s e of S a u s s u r e , we may summarize
a s follows: I n S a u s s u r e ' s c o n c e p t i o n of language ' s o c i a l ' e x c l u d e s t h e
c o - e x i s t e n c e of t h e p h y s i c a l ; Zangue i s i n t h e f i n a l a n a l y s i s a p u r e l y
p s y c h i c phenomenon whereas t h e psycho-physical mechanism of language
p e r t a i n s t o p a r o l e o n l y ( c f . CLG, 3 1 ) . For Baudouin t h e s o c i a l a s p e c t
i s something which e x i s t s only d u r i n g t h e moments of l i n g u i s t i c com-
munication, whereas t h e b a s i c a s p e c t a p p e a r s t o b e t h e p s y c h o - p h y s i o l o g i c a l
r e a l i t y of speech. We d i s a g r e e , however, w i t h H s u s l e r (1968:40) who
q u o t e s t h e f o l l o w i n g s t a t e m e n t by Baudouin t o s u p p o r t h i s c o n t e n t i o n t h a t
S a u s s u r e had employed ' s o c i a l ' i n p l a c e s where Baudouin used ' i n d i v i d u a l '
and v i c e v e r s a : "The a r t i c u l a t o r y and a u d i t i v e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s [of
language] become m a n i f e s t by means of p h o n e t i c phenomena which do n o t
e x i s t a t a l l , s i n c e t h e y a r e n o t h i n g b u t t r a n s i t i o n p e r i o d s of s o c i a l
i n t e r c o u r s e . 1112
We f i n d , on t h e o t h e r hand, s t r i k i n g s i m i l a r i t i e s between Baudouin's
( a l l e g e d ) psychologism and some of ~ a u s s u r e ' sa f f i r m a t i o n s , p a r t i c u l a r l y
w i t h r e g a r d t o Baudouin's l a t e r d e f i n i t i o n of t h e phoneme a s "a uniform
r e p r e s e n t a t i o n [ h e u s e s t h e term ' V o r s t e l l u n g ' ] which b e l o n g s t o t h e
p h o n e t i c world, [and] which a r i s e s i n t h e mind by means of p s y c h i c f u s i o n
of t h e i m p r e s s i o n s caused by t h e p r o n u n c i a t i o n of one and t h e same sound =
p s y c h i c e q u i v a l e n t of t h e speech sound" (BdC, 1895:9) .I3 Apart from t h e
f a c t t h a t S a u s s u r e observed i n h i s Cours t h a t e v e r y t h i n g i n l a n g u a g e i s
p s y c h o l o g i c a l (CLG, 2 1 ) , a s t a t e m e n t which seems t o c o n t r a d i c t h i s f r e q u e n t
o b s e r v a t i o n s t h a t language i s a s o c i a l f a c t ( i f ~ Z u s l e ri s c o r r e c t ) ,
he also s t a t e d explicitly: "La l a n g u e e x i s t e dans l a c o l l e c t i v i t 6 s o u s
l a forme d ' u n e somme d'ernpreintes dZpos2es dans chaque c e r v e a u " (CLG, 38,
o u r i t a l i c s ) ; t h i s was n o t a p a s s i n g remark b u t a p p e a r s t o have r e p r e s e n t e d
a t one t i m e a fundamental t e n e t of h i s t h e o r y ( c f . CLG, 27-32 [passim]).
Thus S a u s s u r e p o i n t e d o u t , when proposing h i s d e f i n i t i o n of t h e l i n g u i s t i c
s i g n which c o n s i s t s , i n h i s t,erms, of t h e union of a concept and a n
a c o u s t i c image: " C e t t e d e r n i s r e [ i . e . t h e a c o u s t i c image] n ' e s t pas l e
s o n m a t e r i e l , chose purement physique, mais l ' e m p r e i n t e psychique d e
c e s o n , l a r e p r g s e n t a t i o n que nous en donne l e tgmoinage d e nos s e n s "
(CLG, 98; c f . CLG(E), 1 4 9 ) . We a r e i n c l i n e d t o b e l i e v e t h a t S a u s s u r e
f o l l o w e d Baudouin's concept of t h e phoneme,14 under t h e i n f l u e n c e of
t h e g e n e r a l psychologism of h i s t i m e ( r e p r e s e n t e d n o t o n l y by S t e i n t h a l
and M o r i t z Lazarus 11824-19031, b u t a l s o by Wundt a s w e l l a s by t h e neo-
grammarians, i n p a r t i c u l a r P a u l ) . Milka 1viE a p p e a r s t o b e c o r r e c t
when s h e n o t e s t h a t S a u s s u r e had used t h e term phoneme i n h i s e a r l y
w r i t i n g s (we b e l i e v e t h a t s h e r e f e r s t o t h e ~ 6 m o i r ei n p a r t i c u l a r ) " t o
d e s i g n a t e t h e sound element which, whatever i t s a c t u a l a r t i c u l a t i o n ,
was c l e a r l y d i s t i n g u i s h e d from t h e o t h e r elements of t h e same phono-
l o g i c a l system" (1965:133), t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n of p s y c h o l o g i c a l c r i t e r i a
b e l o n g i n g ( a s i t was i n ~ a u d o u i n ' s own development, we may add) t o Saus-
s u r e ' s l a t e r p e r i o d .15 It a p p e a r s , however, t h a t S a u s s u r e a t t e m p t e d
t o f r e e h i m s e l f from t h e l a t e n t psychologism of some of h i s l i n g u i s t i c
c o n c e p t s i n h i s l a s t c o u r s e on g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s i n which h e i n t r o d u c e d
t h e much more a b s t r a c t terms of s i g n i f i z and s i g n i f i a n t t o r e p l a c e t h e
e x p r e s s i o n s of concept and a c o u s t i c image ( s e e 2.2.3.1).
A s f o r S a u s s u r e ' s Zangue/paroZe d i s t i n c t i o n ( t o which h i s concept
of Zangage s h o u l d b e added), no c o n v i n c i n g p a r a l l e l i s m between t h e s e two
s c h o l a r s c a n b e e s t a b l i s h e d a l t h o u g h i t might have been t h a t S a u s s u r e
was i n s p i r e d by Baudouin's a p p a r e n t d i f f i c u l t i e s and l a c k o f c l a r i t y ,
ex negativo s o t o speak. But t h i s can o n l y remain s p e c u l a t i o n where
p r o o f s are needed. However, i t h a s been s u g g e s t e d on o c c a s i o n t h a t
Baudouin a n t i c i p a t e d S a u s s u r e ' s i n f l u e n t i a l dichotomy of synchrony v e r s u s
diachrony i n l i n g u i s t i c s . 1 6 It is t r u e t h a t i n h i s inaugural l e c t u r e
a t S t . P e t e r s b u r g U n i v e r s i t y a s e a r l y a s i n 1870, Baudouin n o t o n l y
made a d i s t i n c t i o n between s c i e n t i f i c and p r a c t i c a l s t u d i e s of language,
and a n e a r l y a t t e m p t a t l i n g u i s t i c typology, b u t a l s o d i s t i n g u i s h e d
between dynamic and s t a t i c phonology. I n p a r t i c u l a r h e conceived of
'sound s t a t i c s ' t o i n v e s t i g a t e t h e "laws and c o n d i t i o n s of t h e l i f e of
sounds i n a s t a t e of language a t a g i v e n moment" whereas 'sound dynamics'
was t o a n a l y z e " t h e laws and c o n d i t i o n s of t h e e v o l u t i o n of sounds through
17
t i m e " , a s t a t e m e n t s i m i l a r t o t h a t of h i s 1877178 Kazan l e c t u r e s .
L a t e r , i n an a r t i c l e p u b l i s h e d i n 1899, Baudouin d i s t i n g u i s h e d f u r t h e r
I

between t h e dynamic and t h e h i s t o r i c a l a s p e c t s of p h o n e t i c r e s e a r c h .

The dynamic a s w e l l a s t h e s t a t i c v i e w p o i n t s were b o t h t o b e employed i n
d e s c r i p t i v e p h o n e t i c s , under which Baudouin i n c l u d e d anthropophonics and
psycho-phonetics; s t a t i c s was d e f i n e d a s t h e " i n v e s t i g a t i o n and des-
c r i p t i o n of e x i s t i n g m a t t e r s , e x c l u d i n g t h e a s p e c t of e v o l u t i o n " , whereas
dynamics was envisaged a s t h e " i n v e s t i g a t i o n and d e f i n i t i o n of t h e con-
d i t i o n s of [ p h o n e t i c ] changef'. l8 F i n a l l y , h i s t o r i c a l p h o n e t i c s was
t o d e s c r i b e p h o n e t i c changes through t i m e i n t h e manner which S a u s s u r e
d e f i n e d a s t h e d i a c h r o n i c o r e v o l u t i o n a r y a s p e c t of language a n a l y s i s .
A s f o r ~ a u s s u r e ' s c o n c e p t i o n of synchrony, i t i s w e l l known t h a t
h e i n s i s t e d t h a t synchrony was concerned w i t h t h e language s t a t e ex-
c l u s i v e l y ( c f . CLG, 142: SM, 260, and, w i t h some d e v i a t i n g i n d i c a t i o n s ,
LTS, 2 2 ) , a viewpoint m a i n t a i n e d by t h e "Geneva School", b u t c o n t e s t e d
by R. Jakobson i n 1928. There a r e r e a s o n s t o b e l i e v e t h a t S a u s s u r e ,
who was a c q u a i n t e d w i t h Baudouin a s w e l l a s w i t h h i s work,19 had n o t
s e e n t h e above mentioned a r t i c l e by Baudouin w r i t t e n i n P o l i s h f o r an
e n c y c l o p a e d i a ; o t h e r w i s e h e might w e l l have followed Baudouin's d i s -
t i n c t i o n between a dynamic and s t a t i c a s p e c t of language w i t h i n l i n -
g u i s t i c synchrony - how e l s e could a b l a u t , umlaut, and syncope which
20
do n o t o n l y o c c u r i n d i a c h r o n i c l i n g u i s t i c s b e a d e q u a t e l y d e s c r i b e d ?
L. V. g r e r b a (1880-1944), one of Baudouin's most i m p o r t a n t p u p i l s , p o i n t e d
o u t i n h i s o b i t u a r y of Baudouin t h a t h e had " i n s i s t e d on t h e s c i e n t i f i c
a n a l y s i s of t h e p r e s e n t [ s t a t e o f l a n g u a g e ] , i n which h e d i s t i n g u i s h e d
between l a y e r s of t h e p a s t a s w e l l a s t h o s e f o r f u t u r e [developments].
I n t h i s r e s p e c t ~ a u d o u i n ' s synchronism was q u i t e d i s t i n c t from t h e ex-
tremely s t a t i c synchronism i n d e S a u s s u r e . 1121
To conclude o u r i n v e s t i g a t i o n i n t o p o s s i b l e s o u r c e s of S a u s s u r e a n
i n s p i r a t i o n through ~ a u d o u i n ' sw r i t i n g s , we can s a y t h a t ~ a u s s u r e ' s
e a r l y d i s t i n c t i o n between h i s t o r i c a l and d e s c r i p t i v e l i n g u i s t i c s may
have had i t s i n i t i a l s t i m u l u s i n ~ a u d o u i n ' s s t a t e m e n t s of t h e s e v e n t i e s .
However, o t h e r p o s s i b l e i n f l u e n c e s cannot b e r u l e d o u t . It should b e
borne i n mind f o r example t h a t S a u s s u r e s t a r t e d t e a c h i n g a t P a r i s i n
F a l l 1881, more t h a n one y e a r a f t e r t h e f i r s t appearance of ~ a u l ' s
i n f l u e n t i a l Prinzipien, a book which was c e r t a i n l y a t l e a s t a s e a s i l y
a c c e s s i b l e t o him a s ~ a u d o u i n ' sp u b l i c a t i o n s (some of which Baudouin
had p r e s e n t e d t o t h e L i n g u i s t i c S o c i e t y of P a r i s , a s we have mentioned
earlier). We a r e i n c l i n e d t o b e l i e v e t h a t ~ a u s s u r e ' s p s y c h o l o g i c a l
c o n c e p t i o n of t h e p h o n e t i c a s p e c t of t h e l i n g u i s t i c s i g n owes much t o
Baudouin's c o n c e p t i o n of t h e phoneme a s a p s y c h i c i m p r e s s i o n on t h e mind
of t h e i n d i v i d u a l . 2 2 Any a c t u a l profound d i r e c t i n f l u e n c e by Baudouin
on S a u s s u r e h a s t o b e d e n i e d ; Baudouin's w r i t i n g s make g e n e r a l l y d i f f i c u l t
r e a d i n g owing t o t h e d i f f u s e n e s s of h i s s t y l e (and probably a l s o t h o u g h t )
and e x c e s s i v e u s e of newly coined t e c h n i c a l terminology w i t h v a c i l l a t i n g
23
s e m a n t i c s ( c f . H z u s l e r , 1968:8 and 139, n.179).
 FOOTNOTES - 1.3.3.2

"Baudouin d e C o u r t enay a n d P h o n o l o g i c a l A n a l y s i s " , Linguis tique

2.2:15-29 ( 1 9 6 6 ) , h e r e p . 1 9 . For a d e t a i l e d s t u d y of BdC's p h o n o l o g i c a l
t h e o r i e s and p r a c t i c e s , s . pp. 19-25 i n S c h o g t ' s p a p e r , and H x u s l e r ' s
monograph (1968 :46-67 [passim]) .
2
Op. c i t . , 1 8 . S i n c e we a r e n o t c o n c e r n e d w i t h BdC's p h o n o l o g i c a l
c o n c e p t i o n s n o r FdS 's i n f l u e n c e on him and Kruszewski, we may s i m p l y
r e f e r t o s e c t i o n s 2, "Baudouin as e m p i r i c i s t and as t h e o r e t i c i a n : The
phoneme i d e a " , and 3 , "The r e l a t i o n between Baudouin d e C o u r t e n a y ,
M. Kruszewski, and F . d e S a u s s u r e " , i n o u r p a p e r , " R e f l e c t i o n s on J a n
Baudouin d e C o u r t e n a y and h i s P l a c e i n t h e H i s t o r y of L i n g u i s t i c S c i e n c e " ,
t o a p p e a r i n CSZP.

YY
S. h i s S t . P e t e r s b u r g Univ. M a s t e r ' s t h e s i s , Gpyt drevne-pol 'skom
obscie xameeanija o jazykovedenii i jazyke ( L e i p z i g : Behr & Hermann,
1870), v i i i + 99 + 8 4 + i v pp.
4
Gpy t f o n e t i k i r e z 'janskix govorov ( S t . P e t e r s b u r g & Warsaw, 1875) ,
a r e v i s e d v e r s i o n of which a p p e a r e d under t h e t i t l e " ~ e s k o l ' k o s l o v o
s r a v i t e l ' n o j grammatike i n d o e v r o p e j s k i x jazykov", & 213:269-321 ( 1 8 8 1 ) .

" F a k u l t a t i v e S p r a c h l a u t e " , Donum Natalicium Schrijnen, 38-43;

e s p . p. 43 w h e r e h e c h a s t i s e s h i m s e l f f o r h a v i n g w a s t e d h i s t i m e on d a t a
c o l l e c t i n g ( t h e r e s u l t s o f which had p e r i s h e d d u r i n g t h e r e v o l u t i o n of
1917 i n R u s s i a ) .
iiber d i e Lautabwechstung (Kazan: ~ni~ersit<tsbuchdruckerei,
36.
7 I, J a n , I g n a c y , Niecis2aw Baudouin d e Courtenay (1845-1929)",
.
1 5 . 1 : v i i - x x i i (1930) ; h e r e p v i i i .

I n h i s c o n t r i b u t i o n "Jqzykoznawstwo" t o t h e P o l i s h e n c y c l o p a e d i a ,
WieZka EncykZopedya Powszechna IZustrowa (Warsaw 1 9 0 3 ) , v o l . 33, 278-96,
Baudou i n was q u i t e e x p l i c i t on t h i s p o i n t : "The o r i g i n a l l y m e t a p h y s i c a l
c h a r a c t e r of t h i s b r a n c h of s c i e n c e [ i . e . l i n g u i s t i c s ] h a s r e c e d e d more
and more b e h i n d t h e p s y c h o l o g i c a l t r e a t m e n t of l a n g u a g e ( S t e i n t h a l ,
L a z a r u s , a n d o t h e r s ) , which t o d a y r e c e i v e s more and more a d h e r e n t s and
which w i l l g r a d u a l l y , i n agreement w i t h t h e p s y c h i c b a s i s of t h e human
l a n g u a g e , become t h e s o l e t r e n d i n l i n g u i s t i c s . " (284).
 "Einige ~ i l l de e r Wirkung d e r Analogie i n d e r p o l n i s c h e n Dekli-
nation", BVSpr 6:19-88 [1870]; S,chleicher, e d i t o r of t h i s j o u r n a l , t o -
g e t h e r w i t h A d a l b e r t Kuhn (1812-81), was n o t p l e a s e d w i t h BdC's t h e o r e -
t i c a l i n t r o d u c t i o n (because of i t s psychologism) and d e l e t e d i t from t h e
a r t i c l e . BdC (1904:177) r e s t o r e d t h i s i n t r o d u c t i o n ( i n P o l . t r a n s l . ) .

lo It i s g e n e r a l l y h e l d t h a t B ~ C ' S i d e a s about t h e p s y c h o l o g i c a l
n a t u r e of language can b e t r a c e d back t o Johann F r i e d r i c h H e r b a r t ' s
Psychologie aZs Wissenschaft of 1824125 ( a s many of h i s i n s i g h t s i n t o
l i n g u i s t i c m a t t e r s can b e s e e n a s having t h e i r u l t i m a t e s o u r c e i n Hum-
b o l d t ) . I n 1904, BdC s t a t e d h i m s e l f : "Wilhelm von Humboldt's p h i l o -
s o p h i c a l system and t h e a p p l i c a t i o n of H e r b a r t ' s psychology t o t h e i n v e s -
t i g a t i o n of l i n g u i s t i c r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s ( f o r i n s t a n c e ) have g i v e n t o l i n -
g u i s t i c s i t s p a r t i c u l a r c h a r a c t e r a s a t r u e s c i e n c e which i s based on t h e
u s e of psychology f o r [ t h e a n a l y s i s o f ] language." (BdC, 1963 11, 4 ) .
11
Cf. G i u l i a n o Bonfante, "Una nuova formulazione d e l l a l e g g e d i
F. d e Saussure", Studi BaZtici 1:73-91 ( l 9 3 l ) , e s p . 75-6; Ljubov' V a s i l l -
eva Matveeva-Isaeva, "Zakon Fortunatova-de S o s s j u r a " , IRJaSZ 3.1:137-78
(1930) , e s p . p. 138.

l2 BdC, "0 'prawach g l o s o w y ~ h " ' , RSZ 3:l-57 (1910); o u r E. v e r s i o n

f o l l o w s H h s l e r ' s G . r e n d e r i n g of t h e F r . summary, "Les l o i s phon&iques",
i b i d . , 57-82; h e r e p. 62.
l3 T h i s i s BdC's most f r e q u e n t l y quoted d e f i n i t i o n of t h e phoneme,
and, a l t h o u g h under a t t a c k from v a r i o u s s i d e s , was i n f l u e n t i a l i n t h e
e a r l y y e a r s of Prague p h o n o l o g i c a l t h e o r y ; c f . t h e work of Trubeckoj
.
( c f H s u s l e r , 1968: 70-3) .
l4We have t o admit, however, t h a t no t e x t u a l b a s i s h a s been found
f o r t h e term repr&entation i n t h e CLG ( c f . pp. 28, 9 8 ) ; s e e CLG(E), 37
and 149 r e s p e c t i v e l y . It i s c u r i o u s t o n o t e t h a t t h e r e c e n t 1 9 t h r e v .
ed. of Siebs-Deutsche Aussprache, ed. by Helmut d e Boor, e t a l . ( B e r l i n :
W. d e G r u y t e r , 1969) d e f i n e s t h e r e l a t i o n between sound and phoneme i n
t h e f o l l o w i n g manner: " I m U n t e r s c h i e d zum L a u t , d e r p h y s i o l o g i s c h -
a k u s t i s c h e n C h a r a k t e r h a t , i s t d a s Phonem e i n e p s y c h o l o g i s c h e GrGsse,
e i n e L a u t v o r s t e l l u n g , d i e zu anderen L a u t v o r s t e l l u n g e n i m Gegensatz
s t e h t und damit d a s Phonem zum B e d e u t u n g s t r z g e r macht; d i e s e l b e l a u t l i c h e
Erscheinung kann a l s 'Laut ' und 'Phonem' auf t r e t e n . " (17-8).

l5 M. 1vi; does n o t s p e c i f y what s h e means by " l a t e r " (we may assume

t h a t s h e meant FdS's l e c t u r e s on g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s ) ; s h e f a i l s t o
s u b s t a n t i a t e h e r c l a i m t h a t from t h e " l a t e r [ i . e . p s y c h o l o g i c a l ] i n t e r -
p r e t a t i o n t h e French s c h o o l (. .. ) t o o k t h e i d e a of t h e phoneme a s a
l i n g u i s t i c u n i t i n t h e s e n s e of a n a u d i t o r y - p h y s i o l o g i c a l , p s y c h o l o g i c a l
and f u n c t i o n a l complex" (1965:133); nor does h e r r e f e r e n c e t o 158
(pp. 84-5) t u r n up a n y t h i n g i n s u p p o r t of h e r c o n t e n t i o n ; ~ r 6 a land
R o u s s e l o t b o t h of whom were a g e n e r a t i o n o l d e r t h a n FdS would h a r d l y
seem t o have been i n f l u e n c e d by him d u r i n g h i s l e c t u r e s h i p a t P a r i s
(1881-91) .
 .
Cf Plih2ly ~ G t e r ' sremarks, "L. V. . Z e r b a a l s F o r s c h e r d e r
r u s s i s c h e n Sprache", SSZav 4.1/2r 1-21 ( l 9 5 8 ) , e s p . 3-4.

. Y
l7 Cf "Nekotorye o b g z i e zamecanij a o j azykovedenii i jazyke",
153: 279-316 ( l 8 7 l ) , p a r t l y r e p r . i n Zvegincev, 1964: 263-83, and
BdC, 1963 I , 47-77; h e r e p . 66. For t h e 1877178 r e f e r e n c e , s e e BdC,
1963 I , 110.

l8 "Fonologja", Wietka Encyktopedya Powszeehna IZustrowana 22:

791-8 (Warsaw 1899); quoted from BdC, 1963 I, 355.

l9 That FdS was w e l l a c q u a i n t e d w i t h BdC1s work h a s r e c e n t l y been

emphasized by A l e k s e j ~ l e k s e e v i z~ e o nlev, t an a u t h o r i t y on Baudouin,
i n h i s n o t e " ~ o d u & i f r a n c u z s k a j a l i n g v i s t i k a " , IzvAN 25.4:329-32 (1966).

20 Cf. on t h i s p o i n t o u r p a p e r , "A Note on T r a n s f o r m a t i o n a l - G e n e r a t i v e

Grammar and t h e Saussurean Dichotomy of Synchrony v e r s u s Diachrony",
L h g . Beriehte 13:25-32 (May 1971).

21 " ~ o d u & d e Kurten;. Nekrolog", IRJaSl 3:311-26 (l93O), a t p. 319.

22 I t s h o u l d b e n o t e d however t h a t a n o t h e r d e f i n i t i o n i n t h e Cowls
of t h e phoneme became c r u c i a l f o r t h e P r a g u e p h o n o l o g i s t s a s can b e
s e e n from t h e f o l l o w i n g p a s s a g e t a k e n from T r u b e c k o j ' s a r t i c l e "La phono-
l o g i e a c t u e l l e " , JPs 30:227-246 (1933), p . 228, n.1: "Les phonsmes
s o n t avant t o u t des e n ti d s oppositives , r e l a t i v e s e t nggatives " .
(CLG, 1 6 4 ) . Godel (SM, 272), however, d i s a p p r o v e s of t h e e d i t o r s ' u s e
of t h e term phoneme i n t h i s s t a t e m e n t ; s . CLG(E) , 268, which g i v e s t h e
s t u d e n t ' s n o t e of ~ d S ' ss t a t e m e n t .

23 This can a l s o b e s e e n i n ~ P u s l e r ' s thorough monograph on BdC

and h i s l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r i e s which mentions FdS q u i t e f r e q u e n t l y (1968:
8, 39-41, 64, 70, 72, 74, 76-8, 111; and n o t e s , 132 [No. 331, 136 [Nos.
108 t o 1 1 0 ] ) , b u t does n o t s e e any s t r i k i n g p a r a l l e l i s m between t h e i r
l i n g u i s t i c c o n c e p t s . S. a l s o o u r d e t a i l e d review a r t i c l e on ~ k s l e r ' s
s t u d y which i s t o appear i n Linguistics (1971). I n h i s a r t i c l e , "Fone-
t i z e s k a j a t e r m i n o l o g i j a v t r u d a x I. A . ~ o d u z n ad e Kurten$", ~ i n ~ v i s t i z e s -
kaja temrino Zogija i prik Zadnaja toponomas t i k a , comp by A. A. R e f or- .
m a t s k i j (Moscow: I z d . "Nauka", l 9 6 4 ) , 7-30, V. S. Minavicev l i s t s 67
terms which BdC used i n h i s p h o n e t i c and p h o n o l o g i c a l t r e a t i s e s , many
of which h e had i n v e n t e d h i m s e l f .
1.3.3.3 Mikolaj Kruszewski's L i n g u i s t i c T h e o r i e s

~ ] ; ;ue .svoem "0:erke ", za tri desj a t i Zetija

do "Kursa" Sossjura, ~ r u g e v s kj i zajavi ZJ
;to, ' f ~ Z e~s t v' ~
znak vesci" i ;to 12jazyk
e s t f ne ;to inoe, kak systema znakov".

J E n i s V. Loja (1968:237)
*

S i n c e Baudouin d e Courtenay's e x t e n s i v e o b i t u a r y of h i s former

s t u d e n t c o n s t i t u t e s a l m o s t t h e o n l y s o u r c e of o u r knowledge of Mikokaj
Habdank-Kruszewski's (1851-87)
l i f e and work, t h e r e l a t i o n between t h e s e
1
two l i n g u i s t s seems t o remain a p u z z l e i n t h e h i s t o r y of l i n g u i s t i c s .
Baudouin's a t times almost s a r c a s t i c remarks about Kruszewski and h i s
a f f i r m a t i o n t h a t h e had p u t a l l h i s knowledge a t Kruszewski's d i s p o s a l
and t h a t h i s p u p i l ' s w r i t i n g s were much l e s s o r i g i n a l t h a n t h e i r a u t h o r
2
b e l i e v e d , have persuaded a number of s c h o l a r s t o minimize Kruszewski's
i m p o r t a n c e i n t h e development of modern l i n g u i s t i c thought . 3 A . A.
L e o n t ' e v went s o f a r a s t o a r g u e t h a t thelKazan S c h o o l ' had n o t o n l y
b e e n o v e r e s t i m a t e d by i n t e r n a t i o n a l l i n g u i s t s b u t t h a t such a s c h o o l
n e v e r e x i s t e d 4 and even went a s t e p f u r t h e r i n h i s somewhat c u r i o u s
foreword t o B e r e z i n (1968:3-24) by a v e r r i n g t h a t Kruszewski a s w e l l a s
V. A . B o g o r o d i c k i j (l857-1941), a n o t h e r of Baudouin's o u t s t a n d i n g Kazan
s t u d e n t s , were no more t h a n s e c o n d - r a t e l i n g u i s t s who f o r t h e most p a r t
reworked some of t h e i r m a s t e r ' s i d e a s w h i l e fundamentally m i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g
others.
It i s almost n e e d l e s s t o s a y t h a t Kruszewski 's c o n t r i b u t i o n t o
l i n g u i s t i c thought h a s been even more ignored by w e s t e r n l i n g u i s t s and
h i s t o r i a n s t h a n Baudouin's work.5 S i n c e 1967, however, t h e r e h a s been
a v a i l a b l e i n t h e West a paper by R. Jakobson which i s devoted t o Krus-
z e w s k i ' s importance i n t h e development of p i v o t a l i s s u e s i n modern l i n -
g u i s t i c t h e o r y and i n which Jakobson makes a number of i n t e r e s t i n g and
somewhat provoking claims: 1 ) ~ r u s z e w s k i ' s i d e a s had a profound and
b e n e f i c i a l i n f l u e n c e on t h e t h e o r e t i c a l thought of S a u s s u r e ; 2) t h e
P o l i s h l i n g u i s t ' s o r i g i n a l t e n e t of t h e complete harmony of t h e l i n g u i s t i c
system and of i t s p a r t s has n o t o n l y become a p r i n c i p l e of s t r u c t u r a l i s m
b u t a l s o c l o s e l y corresponds t o 'Saussure's concept of langue; 3 ) t h e
e s s e n t i a l p a r t of ~ a u s s u r e ' s Cows which d e a l s w i t h s y n c h r o n i c l i n g u i s t i c s
owes much t o Kruszewski's s y n t h e s i s , i n p a r t i c u l a r ( a ) S a u s s u r e ' s rapports
syntagmatiques et associatifs v i s - & v i s Kruszewski's d i s t i n c t i o n between
(intra-lingual) r e l a t i o n s of s i m i l a r i t y and r e l a t i o n s of c o n t i g u i t y ,
and (b) f u r t h e r i d e a s connected w i t h t h i s dichotomy, e . g . S a u s s u r e ' s
' s u i t e l i n 6 a i r e 1 and 'groupement p a r f a m i l l e s ' i n t h e c a s e of p a r a d i g -
6
matic a s s o c i a t i o n s .
Jakobson even goes s o f a r a s t o a t t r i b u t e more a d e q u a t e s t a t e m e n t s
about t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between t h e s y n c h r o n i c and t h e d i a c h r o n i c a s p e c t
of language, and more s y s t e m a t i c t r e a t m e n t of l i n g u i s t i c problems t o
Kruszewski t h a n t o b o t h Baudouin and S a u s s u r e ( ! ) ; i n p a r t i c u l a r , h e
a t t a c h e s much importance t o Kruszewski 's o b s e r v a t i o n s concerning (what
Jakobson c l a i m s t o b e ) t h e " c r e a t i v e a s p e c t of language".7 These l a t t e r
c o n t e n t i o n s , however, can o n l y b e of m a r g i n a l concern i n o u r p r e s e n t
d i s c u s s i o n s i n c e t h e p o t e n t i a l i n f l u e n c e of Kruszewski on S a u s s u r e i s i t s
topic. I n c i d e n t a l l y , Kruszewski's t h e o r e t i c a l works of 1881 and 1883
h a v e b o t h b e e n t r a n s l a t e d i n t o German; a s f o r t h e l i t t l e t r e a t i s e %er
die ~~utabwechslung
we have a l r e a d y e s t a b l i s h e d s u f f i c i e n t e v i d e n c e t h a t
S a u s s u r e had s e e n i t d u r i n g h i s s t a y i n P a f i s (1880-91) .8 Where t h e
0;erk nauki o jaxyke i s concerned, which F r i e d r i c h
German v e r s i o n of
Techmer (1843-91) p r e p a r e d , i n c l u d i n g i t i n sequences i n h i s Internationale
Zeitschrif* fiir allgemsine Sprachwissenschaft,9 we now know t h a t S a u s s u r e
owned t h e complete s e t of f i v e volumes which appeared d u r i n g 1884 and
10
1890.
T h e r e i s n o t much of i n t e r e s t t o t h e p r e s e n t d i s c u s s i o n t o b e found
i n t h e f i r s t p a r t of Kruszewski's h e r die Lautabwechslung (1881:7-28),
11 However,
i n which h e expounds h i s t h e o r y of v o c a l i c a l t e r n a t i o n .
f o l l o w i n g t h e acknowledgements (1881:l-2) there is a general introductory
p a r t which d e s e r v e s some a t t e n t i o n . Kruszewski s t a r t s , q u i t e provokingly
we b e l i e v e ( i f one c o n s i d e r s t h e t i m e a t which t h i s monograph a p p e a r e d ) ,
with t h e following statement: ''~obody w i l l deny t h a t t h o s e phenomena
whose t o t a l i t y i s c a l l e d language, have t o b e t h e o b j e c t of l i n g u i s t i c s
and t h a t t h e u l t i m a t e g o a l of t h i s s c i e n c e must c o n s i s t of t h e d i s c o v e q
of Zms which govern t h e s e pheno'mena. I f (1881: 3) . Kruszewski t h e n goes
on t o c r i t i c i z e t h e t r a d i t i o n a l concept and aims of l i n g u i s t i c s t u d y which
a r e e x c l u s i v e l y concerned w i t h t h e g e n e t i c r e l a t i o n s h i p of languages and
t h e r e c o n s t r u c t i o n of t h e i r p r o t o l a n g u a g e s adding: "It i s q u i t e un-
n e c e s s a r y t o p r o v e t h a t a l l t h e s e m a t t e r s cannot b e recognized a s s c i e n c e t f
i d . . He proposes i n s t e a d t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t of a l i n g u i s t i c s c i e n c e
which can b e envisaged a s h a v i n g two d i s t i n c t g o a l s : 1 ) To d i s c o v e r t h e
( g e n e r a l ) laws of l i n g u i s t i c phenomena, and 2) t o d e a l w i t h t r a d i t i o n a l
problems among other things, c l a i m i n g t h a t such a g e n e r a l s c i e n c e would
b e t t e r h a n d l e t h o s e q u e s t i o n s p e r t a i n i n g t o t h e genealogy of languages
and t h e r e c o n s t r u c t i o n of o l d e r forms (which Kruszewski terms t h e archeo-
12
l o g i c a l trend i n l i n g u i s t i c s ) .
Kruszewski goes on t o a c c u s e contemporary l i n g u i s t i c s f o r i t s obvious
n e g l e c t of modern languages; i n p a r t i c u l a r , h e h o l d s t h a t t h e spoken
languages of today s h o u l d b e t h e prime o b j e c t of l i n g u i s t i c i n v e s t i g a t i o n
and p o i n t s o u t t h a t , only i f t h e s e languages have been analyzed (and t h e
laws governing t h e i r mechanisms), can c o n j e c t u r e s b e made about dead
languages since': " I m Vergangenen, i m Leblosen i s t e s entweder s e h r
schwer o d e r v g l l i g unmaglich d i e Gesetze d e r Erscheinungen zu entdecken."
(1881: 4) 13 Kruszewski t h e n i n t r o d u c e s h i s own g e n e r a l i s a t i o n s , f i r s t
about morphological change (4-5) and t h e n more e x p l i c i t l y on p h o n e t i c
e x p l a n a t i o n s of language e v o l u t i o n (5-26) and f i n a l l y makes a remark on
s e m a n t i c d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n of two p a r a l l e l forms (26-7) followed by a
14
concluding g e n e r a l i z a t i o n (27-8).
We may conclude t h a t t h i s s h o r t t r e a t i s e of n o t more t h a n f o r t y
pages would n o t s a t i s f y someone who was l o o k i n g f o r a g e n e r a l t h e o r y of
language, b u t i t n e v e r t h e l e s s c o u l d have o f f e r e d some encouragement t o
Saussure s i n c e 1 ) i t p u t forward t h e d e s i r a b i l i t y and n e c e s s i t y of a
g e n e r a l ( i z i n g ) approach t o l i n g u i s t i c phenomena, 2) i t made an a t t e m p t
a t f o r m a l i z i n g g e n e r a l laws of l i n g u i s t i c mechanism, and 3) by emphasizing
t h e v a l i d i t y and primacy of t h e i n v e s t i g a t i o n of e x i s t i n g and spoken
languages over t h e h i s t o r i c a l l y t r a n s m i t t e d and w r i t t e n languages,
Kruszewski may have l a i d t h e f o u n d a t i o n f o r S a u s s u r e ' s development of
h i s synchrony/diachrony d i s t i n c t i o n . D i r e c t infZuences, however, c a n n o t
b e deduced from t h e s e observatio'ns, b u t i t c a n h a r d l y b e d e n i e d t h a t t h i s
monograph c o n t a i n s a number of s u g g e s t i o n s which could n o t have f a i l e d
t o a r o u s e i n t e r e s t i n ~ r u s z e w s k i ' smain work P r i n z i p i e n d e r S p r a c h e n t -
wickeZung which we s h a l l d e a l w i t h i n t h e subsequent pages of t h i s c h a p t e r .
When working on h i s o u t l i n e of a l i n g u i s t i c s c i e n c e , Kruszewski
gave t h e f o l l o w i n g summary of t h e aims of h i s forthcoming s t u d y i n a
l e t t e r t o Baudouin of May 3 r d , 1882:

Something l i k e t h i s w i l l b e t h e s u b j e c t of my work; t h e g e n e r a l
argument i s a s f o l l o w s : 1 ) B e s i d e s t h e a c t u a l [ l y e x i s t i n g , i . e .
h i s t o r i c a l - c o m p a r a t i v e ] s c i e n c e of language a n o t h e r much more
g e n e r a l [ s c i e n c e ] , something s i m i l a r t o a phenomenology of l a n -
guage, i s n e c e s s a r y . 2) A c e r t a i n (unconscious) f o r e b o d i n g of
such a s c i e n c e can b e a s s e r t e d i n p a r t s , from a few w r i t i n g s by
t h e neogrammarians. T h e i r p r i n c i p l e s however a r e s t i l l e i t h e r
u n f i t t o b u i l d a s c i e n c e of t h i s kind on o r a r e i n s u f f i c i e n t .
3) It i s p o s s i b l e t o f i n d i n language i t s e l f s o l i d elements f o r
such a s c i e n c e . 1 5

T h i s r6sumg a p p e a r s t o c o n t a i n i n nuce Kruszewski's main t h e s e s

which i n f a c t h e had a l r e a d y p u t forward i n h i s work of 1881, b u t o n l y
e x e m p l i f i e d mainly i n t h e a r e a of morphophonemics. Here, i n h i s t r e a t i s e
of 1883, Kruszewski developed h i s i d e a s f u r t h e r and i s more e x p l i c i t
a b o u t h i s g e n e r a l p r i n c i p l e s of l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y . I t should b e b o r n e
i n mind t h a t Kruszewski (by c o n t r a s t w i t h Baudouin) had been a s t u d e n t
of l o g i c and psychology a t Warsaw U n i v e r s i t y b e f o r e becoming more and
more i n v o l v e d i n t h e s t u d y of language. H i s t e a c h e r , M. M. T r o i c k i j
(1835-99), was a " f a n a t i c o c u l t o r e d e l p e n s i e r o i n g l e s e " (Jakobson) ,
and i t i s t h u s n o t s u r p r i s i n g t o f i n d i n Kruszewski's t r e a t i s e a number
of e x p l i c i t r e f e r e n c e s t o B r i t i s h p h i l o s o p h e r s of t h e 1 9 t h c e n t u r y who
16
were i n t h e e m p i r i c i s t t r a d i t i o n of Locke and Hume. He a l s o a p p e a r s
t o f o l l o w i n a number of r e s p e c t s S t e i n t h a l ' s psychology of language
which a l s o had c o n s i d e r a b l e impact on P a u l ( c f . J e s p e r s en, 1964: 87) ,
17

and, i n t e r e s t i n g l y enough, Kruszewski m a i n t a i n e d t h a t l i n g u i s t i c s b e l o n g s

t o t h e n a t u r a l s c i e n c e s a s S c h l e i c h e r and Max M c l l e r had a r g u e d , a p o i n t
of view which was n o t s h a r e d by Baudouin and which was r e j e c t e d by t h e
neogrammarians w i t h whom Kruszewski o t h e r w i s e f e l t t h e s t r o n g e s t a f f i n i t y
(cf . Kruszewski, 1884: 299) .1 8 It i s t h e r e f o r e n o t s u r p r i s i n g t o s e e
Kruszewski q u o t i n g from Darwin oh s e v e r a l o c c a s i o n s i n s u p p o r t of h i s
own assumptions a b o u t t h e n a t u r e of language ( c f . 1885:262, n.2; 1887:
19
146, n.1, 150-1, n.2, 167, n . 1 ) . The main p r i n c i p l e s (Kruszewski
s p e a k s of axioms) of h i s argument seem t o r e s t on two p i l l a r s : 1 ) psycho-
20
l o g i c a l phenomenology, i n c l u d i n g Humean n o t i o n s of a s s o c i a t i o n (of i d e a s ) ,
and 2) philosophical induction, i . e . t h e methodological p r o c e d u r e of
s t u d y i n g p a r t i c u l a r f a c t s i n o r d e r t o s u p p o r t g e n e r a l laws which have
been claimed t o e x i s t ( c f . Kruszewski, 1884:297), On t h e o t h e r hand
h e n o t e s t h a t a number of h i s i d e a s a r e s i m i l a r t o t h o s e p u t forward
by P a u l i n h i s Prinzipien of 1880, b u t m a i n t a i n s t h a t h e had developed
h i s t h e o r y of a s s o c i a t i o n s i n d e p e n d e n t l y of P a u l ' s 'Organismen von
Vorstellungsgruppen', pointing out t h a t t h e i r studies a r e generally
d i f f e r e n t i n emphasis (Kruszewski i s v e r y much more concerned w i t h t h e
g e n e s i s of l i n g u i s t i c elements which P a u l seems t o i g n o r e ) and i n f a c t
complementary (1884: 300) 21 . We s h a l l , t h e r e f o r e , p o i n t o u t p a r t i c u l a r l y
t h o s e a s p e c t s of Kruszewski's t h e o r i z i n g which appear n o v e l and seem t o
d e v i a t e from t r a d i t i o n a l views.
D e s p i t e i t s t i t l e which would s u g g e s t t h a t Kruszewski i s p r i m a r i l y
concerned w i t h phenomena of language e v o l u t i o n ( a s i s t r u e f o r P a u l ) ,
Prinzipien der SprachentwickZung p u t s a good d e a l of emphasis on what
Kruszewski terms ' s t a t i c laws ' . He proposes t o f o r m u l a t e t h e s e laws
s i n c e h e wishes t o show g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c c o n d i t i o n s f o r language
development which h e b e l i e v e s could b e deduced from h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n s
(1884:297). When d e a l i n g w i t h t h e sounds of language and t h e laws which
h e b e l i e v e s u n d e r l y t h e i r b e h a v i o u r (1884:301-2; 1885:260-8), Kruszewski
assumes 1 ) t h a t t h e sound of a g i v e n d i a l e c t a t a g i v e n t i m e i s almost
22
i d e n t i c a l among a l l i n d i v i d u a l s p e a k e r s of t h e p a r t i c u l a r d i a l e c t ;
2) t h e e x i s t e n c e of a c e r t a i n harmony i n t h e sound system of t h e i n -
23
d i v i d u a l o r t h e d i a l e c t (1884: 301, 303).
Kruszewski c i t e s a number of p h y s i o l o g i c a l and a c o u s t i c e x p l a n a t i o n s
i n s u p p o r t of h i s a f f i r m a t i o n (1885:260-2) t h a t under t h e same c o n d i t i o n s
a g i v e n sound w i l l always b e approximately i d e n t i c a l adding t h a t i n d i v i d u a l
d e v i a t i o n s o r m o d i f i c a t i o n s have no b e a r i n g on t h e language i n g e n e r a l
( p . 261, n . 4 ) , an o b s e r v a t i o n s i m i l a r t o S a u s s u r e ' s c o n t e n t i o n t h a t
Z m g u e i s s o c i a l i n n a t u r e and ( ' e s s e n t i a l l y ) independent of t h e i n d i v i d u a l
( c f . CLG, 3 7 ) . Kruszewski b e l i e v e s t h a t t h e r e i s b i o l o g i c a l and g e n e t i c
e v i d e n c e f o r h i s c l a i m t h a t t h e a r t i c u l a t o r y s i d e of language, t h e speech
h a b i t s , a r e i n h e r i t e d , including n o t only s t a t i c b u t a l s o t o a c e r t a i n
e x t e n t dynamic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of t h e organism (1885:262). However, h e
d e a l s w i t h t h e s t a t i c a s p e c t of t h e sound system o n l y , and d e c l a r e s t h a t
i t is manifest t h a t 1 ) t h e whole sound system of a c e r t a i n i n d i v i d u a l
w i l l always b e s i m i l a r ("ungefghr g l e i c h a r t i g " ) , and 2) t h a t t h e sound
system of a l l i n d i v i d u a l s b e l o n g i n g t o a g i v e n d i a l e c t w i l l b e s i m i l a r
a t a g i v e n time. These two assumptions t o g e t h e r w i t h h i s p o s t u l a t e t h a t
a g e n e r a l harmony p r e v a i l s i n a g i v e n sound system a r e c o n j o i n e d f o r h i s
f o r m u l a t i o n of t h e ' s t a t i c law of t h e sound system' which i s c h a r a c t e r i z e d
by i t s homogeneity and i t s harmony ( p . 263). One could a s k whether t h i s
s t a t e m e n t c o n s t i t u t e d a s o u r c e f o r S a u s s u r e ' s development of synchrony
and h i s c o n c e p t of &tat de Zangue (CLG, 1 4 2 ) .
I n t h e same c h a p t e r , Kruszewski t r e a t s combinations of sounds ("Laut-
komplexe"), a f t e r having d i s c u s s e d i n d i v i d u a l sounds (which h e s a i d
e a r l i e r had no e x i s t e n c e of t h e i r own) .24 He f i r s t admits t h e p o s s i b i l i t y
t h a t a c e r t a i n sound i n combination w i t h a n o t h e r can b e i d e n t i c a l o r
d e v i a t e o n l y i n s e n s i b l y from t h e norm, b u t i n t h e subsequent p a r a g r a p h
h e d e a l s w i t h t h e word which a p p e a r s t o b e t h e 'sound complex' par
exceZZence (1885:263). From t h e p h y s i o l o g i c a l p o i n t of view, Kruszewski
o b s e r v e s , t h e word h a s no p a r t i c u l a r u s e : "it i s a symbol, a s u b s t i t u t e
f o r an i d e a , and a member of t h i s symbolic s e r i e s , s u c h a s t h e sound,
n e v e r a p p e a r s by i t s e l f . " (Bid.) Without g i v i n g any d e f i n i t i o n of
what h e u n d e r s t a n d s by 'symbol', h e goes on t o s t a t e :

D i e s e s Paaren d e r I d e e m i t dem Lautkomplexe i s t n i c h t s a b s o l u t

notwendiges, primgres: i n d e r Sprache d e r Taubstummen v e r b i n d e t
s i c h d i e s e l b e I d e e m i t d e r ~ e b g r d e( G e s t u s ) , i n d e r c h i n e s i s c h e n
Sprache m i t dem s c h r i f t l i c h e n Zeichen, e n d l i c h v e r b i n d e t s i c h
i n v e r s c h i e d e n e n Sprachen e i n und d i e s e l b e I d e e m i t v e r s c h i e d e -
nen Lautkomplexen. (1885:263-4).

It i s d o u b t f u l whether we could draw from t h i s q u o t a t i o n t h e c o n c l u s i o n

t h a t Kruszewski h a s h e r e t e n t a t i v e l y f o r m u l a t e d something s i m i l a r t o
S a u s s u r e ' s arbitraire. A t l e a s t we c a n conclude t h a t a word f o r him i s
c h a r a c t e r i z e d by two components:' i d e a and a c a r r i e r ; t h e v o c a l a s p e c t
i s secondary i n c o n t r a s t t o S a u s s u r e ' s emphasis on t h e ' a c o u s t i c i m a g e v .
I n a l a t e r c h a p t e r of h i s t r e a t i s e , i n which h e a n a l y s e s words i n t o
morphological components (1887:174-87), h e a p p e a r s t o have come t o a
s l i g h t l y d i f f e r e n t view. I n t h e meantime Kruszewski i n t r o d u c e d h i s most
c r u c i a l p r i n c i p l e of l i n g u i s t i c a n a l y s i s : t h e laws of a s s o c i a t i o n have
t h e same s i g n i f i c a n c e f o r l i n g u i s t i c s a s f o r psychology, s i n c e : "Das
Wort e x i s t i e r t nur i m menschlichen G e i s t e " (1887:174), and i s , t h e r e f o r e ,
s u b j e c t e d t o t h e same laws a s any m e n t a l e n t i t y . I n f a c t , h e argues,
t h e word owes i t s e x i s t e n c e e x c l u s i v e l y t o t h e laws of a s s o c i a t i o n
(1885:264). Kruszewski s i n g l e s o u t onomatopoetic f o r m a t i o n s i n which
h e d e t e c t s something l i k e a more n e c e s s a r y combination of .an i d e a w i t h
a sound complex ( i b i d . ) . He emphasizes t h a t h e r e g a r d s t h e r e d u c t i o n
of P a u l ' s i d e a s a b o u t ' ~ r o d u k t i o n ' and ' ~ e p r o d u k t i o n ' of words t o two
d i s t i n c t laws of a s s o c i a t i o n a s h i s own s t r e s s i n g a t t h e same t i m e t h a t
they p l a y a h i g h l y i m p o r t a n t r c l e i n language (1884:300). I n view of
t h i s a f f i r m a t i o n a s w e l l a s Jakobson's c l a i m t h a t t h i s i s a n a r e a i n
which Kruszewski was n o t o n l y c r e a t i v e b u t a l s o i n f l u e n t i a l a s f a r a s
S a u s s u r e ' s l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r i z i n g i s concerned, Kruszewski 's two p r i n -
c i p l e s of a s s o c i a t i o n of i d e a s ( " I d e e n a s s o z i a t i o n " ) w i l l f i r s t b e ex-
pounded and t h e n a n a l y z e d .
With r e f e r e n c e t o J . S t . M i l l ' s Logic, Kruszewski e x p r e s s e s h i s
c r e d o i n t h e f o l l o w i n g manner:

W i r s i n d iiberzeugt, d a s s d i e Aneignung und d e r Gebrauch d e r

Sprache unmzglich wsre, wenn s i e e i n e Menge von v e r e i n z e l t e n
..
Wzrtern d a r s t e l l t e . D i e ~ E r t e rs i n d m i t e i n a n d e r verbunden:
1. v e r m i t t e l s t d e r AhnZichkeitsassociationen und 2. v e r m i t -
t e l s t d e r Angrenzungsassociationen. Daher e n t s t e h e n Familien
o d e r Systeme und Reihen von Wartern. (1884:304).

Kruszewski t h u s makes a number of i m p o r t a n t assumptions about t h e

n a t u r e of language: F i r s t l y , language i s n o t a c o l l e c t i o n of words,
b u t a s e t of i n t e r r e l a t e d u n i t s ; s e c o n d l y , t h e y a r e r e l a t e d ( i n t h e
human mind) by v i r t u e of two laws of a s s o c i a t i o n : ( a ) t h e law of s i m i -
/

l a r i t y ("lihnlichkeitsassoziation"), and (b) t h e law of c o n t i g u i t y

("Angrenzungsassoziation"), t h e f i r s t c o n n e c t i n g words by means of f o r m a l
a n d l o r s e m a n t i c s i m i l a r i t y , t h e 'second by f r e q u e n t co-occurrence i n a
syntactic string; t h i r d l y , l a n g u a g e c o n s i s t s of f a m i l i e s o r systems
of words and of s u c c e s s i o n s of words. Kruszewski i s more e x p l i c i t on
t h i s i n c h a p t e r 5 of h i s t r e a t i s e , e n t i t l e d "Die ~ g r t e r "(1887:171-4).
There h e r e j e c t s , on e m p i r i c a l grounds, t h e i d e a t h a t l a n g u a g e can b e
v i s u a l i z e d a s a ''WGrtervorrat" which i s memorized by t h e i n d i v i d u a l ;
i f t h i s were t r u e , h e a r g u e s , i t would b e i n c o n c e i v a b l e how man manages
t o f i n d t h e n e c e s s a r y word w i t h i n such a s h o r t time and a s s i g n s t h e
c o r r e c t p h o n e t i c s h a p e t o i t when h e wishes t o e x p r e s s h i m s e l f .
The two k i n d s of a s s o c i a t i o n a r e e x p l a i n e d i n d e t a i l : Every word
i s connected w i t h o t h e r words through a s s o c i a t i o n s of s i m i l a r i t y . Krus-
zewski emphasizes t h a t t h i s s i m i l a r i t y "is n o t only an e x t e r i o r one,
i . e . p h o n e t i c o r morphological, b u t a l s o an internal one, a s e m a n t i c
one." (1887: 171) . I f we want t o remember t h e word vedet "he goes,
guides", t h i s p r o c e d u r e i s f a c i l i t a t e d through t h e e x i s t e n c e of o t h e r
words, such a s vedeg, vedu, vedenie (which belong t o t h e same word f a m i l y ) .
There i s a l s o though a l e s s c l o s e c o n n e c t i o n between vedet, i d e t , neset,
e t c . due t o t h e f a c t t h a t t h e second component - e t (= 3 r d p e r s o n s i n g u l a r )
i s t h e same i n a l l t h e s e words. S t i l l l e s s strong, but nevertheless
e x i s t e n t on grammatical o r morphological grounds, i s t h e c o n n e c t i o n
between vedet and forms such a s govorit "he speaks" o r s t o i t "he s t a n d s 1 ' .
The o t h e r k i n d of a s s o c i a t i o n , which Kruszewski terms t h e law of
c o n t i g u i t y , c a l l s f o r t h o t h e r t y p e s of words which do n o t belong t o t h e
f i r s t category; f o r i n s t a n c e i n a phrase such a s e r . . . das Pferd
am ZiigeZ d i e Strasse entlang "he . . . t h e h o r s e by t h e b r i d l e along t h e
street", our mind w i l l r e c a l l t h e word fiihrt "guides". Similarly, the
e x p r e s s i o n "wear o u t " c a l l s f o r t h words s u c h a s "garment", "dress",
II
trousers", etc.Kruszewski e x p l a i n s t h a t we g e t used t o employing a
26
c e r t a i n word more o f t e n w i t h one word t h a n w i t h a n o t h e r (1887:172).
A s a counter-example Kruszewski c i t e s t h o s e i n s t a n c e s where we f i n d i t
d i f f i c u l t t o remember c e r t a i n words, such a s p a r t i c u l a r p r o p e r names,
f o r e i g n e x p r e s s i o n s o r t e c h n i c a l terms which a r e d i s s o c i a t e d w i t h i n
t h e language and can only b e r e t a i n e d w i t h t h e h e l p of t h e a s s o c i a t i o n
of contiguity: "Es b e d a r f e i n e r o f t w i e d e r h o l t e n Angrenzungsassociation
(d.h. e i n e s s e h r h g u f i g e n Gebrauches), damit e i n Mann a u s dem Volke
[who d o e s n o t know L a t i n f o r example] s i c h e i n fremdes Wort e i n p r z g e ,
d a s keinem Worte s e i n e r e i g e n e n Sprache s h n l i c h s i e h t . ' ' ( 1 8 8 7 : 1 7 2 ) ,
It may, however, happen t h a t t h e s p e a k e r w i l l s u b c o n s c i o u s l y c o n n e c t
c e r t a i n words w i t h c e r t a i n o t h e r s , a procedure which i s ( a c c o r d i n g t o
Kruszewski though q u i t e e r r o n e o u s l y ) c a l l e d analogy (!) and f o l k etymology
(172-3).27 But t h e s e a r e m a r g i n a l a s p e c t s , and do n o t i n v a l i d a t e t h e
p r i n c i p a l t i e s by which words a r e i n t e r r e l a t e d : coexistence ("Koexis tenz")
owing t o s i m i l a r i t y , and consequence ("Konsequenz") due t o t h e i r o c c u r r e n c e
.
i n a l i n e a r f a s h i o n (1887 :173; c f a l s o 1887 :156, 159)
28
.
I t should b e emphasized t h a t Kruszewski p o i n t s o u t t h a t though t h e y
c a n b e f o r m u l a t e d a s two d i s t i n c t c a t e g o r i e s of p s y c h o l o g i c a l o p e r a t i o n s
of t h e mind, b o t h laws of a s s o c i a t i o n work t o g e t h e r : a word i s always
a member of a g i v e n f a m i l y o r system of words and a t t h e same t i m e a
member of a g i v e n s y n t a c t i c sequence ( " s y n t a k t i s c h e Reihe", c f . 1887:172).
I f w e compare ~ r u s z e w s k i ' s f o r m u l a t i o n s w i t h t h o s e made by S a u s s u r e
concerning t h e ' r a p p o r t s syntagmatiques e t a s s o c i a t i f s ' i n language,
we c a n o b s e r v e s t r i k i n g s i m i l a r i t i e s . F i r s t t h e r e i s t h e d u a l i t y of
r e l a t i o n s of l i n g u i s t i c elements. S a u s s u r e a f f i r m s t h a t t h e y correspond
t o two forms of o u r m e n t a l a c t i v i t y b o t h of which a r e i n d i s p e n s a b l e
t o t h e f u n c t i o n i n g of t h e l i n g u i s t i c mechanism ( c f . CLG, 170) . Secondly,
we c a n o b s e r v e a s i m i l a r i t y between t h e s e two exponents : what Kruszewski
c a l l e d c o n t i g u i t y o r consequence i s p a r a l l e l e d by S a u s s u r e ' s c o n c e p t of
s y n t a g m a t i c r e l a t i o n s of l i n g u i s t i c u n i t s ; what Kruszewski termed s i m i -
l a r i t y o r c o e x i s t e n c e (of terms i n t h e mind of t h e s p e a k e r ) i s mutatis
mutandis covered by S a u s s u r e ' s i d e a of a s s o c i a t i v e r e l a t i o n s (CLG, 1 7 0 f . ) .
However, t h e r e a r e d i f f e r e n c e s t o o . S a u s s u r e does n o t seem t o
r e l a t e b o t h r e l a t i o n s h i p s back t o p s y c h i c p r o c e s s e s . As f o r t h e syn-
t a g m a t i c r e l a t i o n s , S a u s s u r e i s concerned w i t h t h e e x e c u t i o n of s y n t a c t i c
u n i t s i n a l i n e a r f a s h i o n , w i t h formal p r o p e r t i e s of t h e l a n g u a g e mechanism;
i t is only with t h e a s s o c i a t i v e r e l a t i o n s t h a t h e s t a t e s t h a t o u t s i d e
d i s c o u r s e "words o f f e r i n g something [which t h e y have] i n common
a r e a s s o c i a t e d i n t h e memory" (CLG, 1 7 1 ) . And S a u s s u r e adds t h a t t h e y
 r e s u l t i n groups which a r e governed by v e r y d i f f e r e n t r e l a t i o n s g i v i n g
t h e f o l l o w i n g example: "Thus t 6 e word enseignement w i l l u n c o n s c i o u s l y
c a l l t o mind a h o s t of o t h e r words ( e i n s e i g n e r , r e n s e i g n e r , etc., or
a l s o armement, changement, e t c ., o r Zducation, a p p r e n t i s s a g e ) " adding
t h a t i n one way o r a n o t h e r t h e y have something i n common ( i b i d . ; c f .
CLG(E), 276 f f . ) . It i s t h e r e f o r e t h e l a t t e r c a t e g o r y which i s almost
i d e n t i c a l w i t h Kruszewski's a f f i r m a t i o n , b u t l e s s s o t h e former one.
It i s i n t e r e s t i n g t o n o t e t h a t S a u s s u r e speaks of syntagms i n con-
n e c t i o n w i t h h i s f i r s t c a t e g o r y of r e l a t i o n s and t h a t h e d e a l s w i t h
words and, i n p a r t i c u l a r , groups of words, s i n c e t h e p h r a s e i s t h e t y p e
par exeeZZence of t h e syntagm; h i s examples a r e e i t h e r p h r a s e s o r com-
pounds ( e . g . c o n t r e m a z t r e ) o r d e r i v a t i o n a l c o n s t r u c t i o n s ( e . g . i n f a t i -
gxbZe). They a l l appear t o u n d e r l i n e t h e i m p r e s s i o n t h a t S a u s s u r e i s
concerned w i t h formal and s t r u c t u r a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s o n l y . It i s t h e r e -
f o r e somewhat s u r p r i s i n g t o n o t e t h a t t h e s e g e n e r a l t y p e s have t h e i r
29
s u p p o r t i n language "sous forme d e s o u v e n i r s c o n c r e t s " (CLG, 1 7 3 ) .
S a u s s u r e , i t seems, h a s n o t been a b l e t o r e l y e x c l u s i v e l y on s t r i c t l y
f o r m a l m a t t e r s i n h i s e x p l a n a t i o n of s y n t a g m a t i c r e l a t i o n s .
C o n t r a s t i n g t h e s e r e l a t i o n s w i t h t h e ' r a p p o r t s a s s o c i a t i f s ' , Saus-
s u r e a r g u e s t h a t whereas a syntagm immediately s u g g e s t s an o r d e r of
s u c c e s s i o n and a d e f i n i t e number of elements, terms i n a n a s s o c i a t i v e
f a m i l y ("f a m i l l e a s s o c i a t i v e " ) o c c u r n e i t h e r i n f i x e d numbers nor i n
a d e f i n i t e o r d e r ( c f . CLG, 1 7 4 ) . One could perhaps s p e a k of a n open
v e r s u s a c l o s e d s e t of i t e m s . To o u r s u r p r i s e , S a u s s u r e c a l l s i n f l e c -
t i o n a l paradigms, e . g . L a t i n dominus, domini, dominb, e t c . , "bien un
groupe a s s o c i a t i f form6 p a r un 616ment commun, l e thzme nominal domin-"
(CLG, 1 7 5 ) . T h i s i s c e r t a i n l y a k i n d of formal p a t t e r n i n g and c o n t a i n s
a l i m i t e d number of combinations, and we might a r g u e t h a t t h i s example
ought t o b e l o n g t o a n o t h e r c a t e g o r y . However, S a u s s u r e ' s example shows
t h e a f f i n i t y of h i s concept of a s s o c i a t i v e r e l a t i o n s w i t h ~ r u s z e w s k i ' s
f o r m u l a t i o n of t h e law of c o n t i g u i t y o p e r a t i n g i n language, b u t a l s o
(sows t h e s e e d ) f o r a f u r t h e r a b s t r a c t i o n of h i s f i n d i n g s by Hjelmslev
who i n t r o d u c e d t h e term ' p a r a d i g m a t i c ' t o r e p l a c e t h e l e s s formal b u t
s u r e l y more a d e q u a t e ( i n terms of t h e n a t u r e of language) Saussurean
expression 'associative'.
 I n c o n c l u s i o n , we may s a y t h a t S a u s s u r e was c e r t a i n l y aware of
~ r u s z e w s k i ' s d i s t i n c t i o n , b u t he' aimed a t something which h e b e l i e v e d
h e could n o t f i n d i n e i t h e r Baudouin o r Kruszewski: "consid6rations
l i n g u i s t i q u e s p u r e s " (SM, 5 1 ) . Kruszewski d e r i v e d h i s i n s i g h t s i n t o
l i n g u i s t i c mechanism from psychology and by i n d u c t i o n ; h i s g e n e r a l view
was t h a t of an e m p i r i c i s t i n t h e p h i l o s o p h i c a l s e n s e . 30 It i s t h e r e -
f o r e i n c o n s e q u e n t i a l t h a t h e does n o t s p e a k i n t h e a f f i r m a t i v e about
31
language a s a system of s i g n s , b u t p r e f e r s t o s p e a k of systems which
32
c a n b e uncovered i n language ( c f . 1884:304; 1887:172). Saussure,
on t h e o t h e r hand, a t t e m p t e d t o approach language from a s t r i c t l y l i n -
g u i s t i c p o i n t of view whenever p o s s i b l e . H i s formulations tend t o b e
more a b s t r a c t , more removed from e m p i r i c a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s . Arens may
b e c o r r e c t i n n o t i n g t h a t Kruszewski's terminology concerning t h e two-
f o l d connexion of words was a h a p p i e r one (1969:359); we could add t h a t
Kruszewski was i n some way c l o s e r t o t h e a c t u a l f a c t s of language, b u t
i n terms of l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y S a u s s u r e i s d e f i n i t e l y more powerful.
This o b s e r v a t i o n does n o t o n l y h o l d t r u e f o r t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between
s y n t a g m a t i c and a s s o c i a t i v e ( p a r a d i g m a t i c ) r e l a t i o n s i n language, b u t
f o r Kruszewski's t h e o r i z i n g i n g e n e r a l . I f we a c c e p t Jakobson's c l a i m
t h a t Kruszewski was "one o f t h e g r e a t e s t o r even t h e g r e a t e s t t h e o r e t i c i a n
i n world l i n g u i s t i c s of t h e l a t e n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y " t h e n we c o u l d o n l y
do s o by e x c l u d i n g P a u l ' s Prinxipien and by terming S a u s s u r e a t w e n t i e t h
century l i n g u i s t .
Kruszewski's i n f l u e n c e on S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r i z i n g , however, can by
no means b e u n d e r e s t i m a t e d . A number of n o t i o n s which we a r e f a m i l i a r
w i t h through t h e Corns a r e i n some way o r o t h e r a n t i c i p a t e d i n Kruszewski.
Thus we f i n d a number of r e f e r e n c e s t o t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between ' s t a t i c '
and 'dynamic' laws of language ( c f . 1885:262; 1887:149), b u t we have
t o admit t h a t Kruszewski does n o t come c l o s e t o ~ a u s s u r e ' s s t r i c t d i s -
33
t i n c t i o n between synchrony and diachrony. The term system i s used
q u i t e f r e q u e n t l y i n Kruszewski's argument, b u t i t n e v e r becomes some-
34
t h i n g l i k e a clg de voGte i n h i s t h e o r i e s a s i n S a u s s u r e ' s . Kru-
s z e w s k i ' s f r e q u e n t u s a g e of t h e concept of harmony w i t h i n a g i v e n l i n -
g u i s t i c system ( c f . 1884:301, n.2; 303, 305; 1885: 263; 1890:134 [bis];
 159
35
137, 138, 139, 140, 347) a t t i m e s comes q u i t e c l o s e t o S a u s s u r e ' s
concept of &tat de langue, f o r i n s t a n c e when h e speaks a b o u t a "Ein-
. 1890: 343)
I

f 6 r m i g k e i t des %ust a n d e s " (1887: 152; cf of a l i n g u i s t i c

system. I n a d d i t i o n , Kruszewski made i n t e r e s t i n g o b s e r v a t i o n s c o n c e r n i n g
t h e language s i g n ; f o r i n s t a n c e h e s t a t e d t h a t t h e word does n o t e x i s t
36
e x c e p t i n t h e human mind (1887:174), and a p p e a r s t o have i n some way
b e e n aware of i t s two-fold c h a r a c t e r ( c f . 1884: 307; 1887: l 7 3 ) , and
p a r t i c u l a r l y when h e d e n i e d t h e n e c e s s i t y of t h e v o c a l a s p e c t of l a n -
guage, v i z . t h e g e s t u r e s used by deaf-mute^,^^ but he interpreted the
word a s t h e s i g n f o r t h e o b j e c t , whereas S a u s s u r e does n o t seem t o h a v e
been concerned w i t h t h e t h i n g t h e s i g n d e s i g n a t e s .
I n view of t h e s e and a few o t h e r c o n c e p t s o r h i n t s which a c l o s e
38
r e a d i n g of Kruszewski's w r i t i n g s r e v e a l , we can conlude t h a t Kruszewski's
s t a t e m e n t s about t h e n a t u r e of language and i t s v a r i o u s mechanisms,
thought a t times l e s s c l e a r and r i g o r o u s t h a n i t a p p e a r s a t f i r s t s i g h t ,
have c e r t a i n l y h e l p e d S a u s s u r e i n s h a p i n g h i s own i d e a s ; i t i s i n t h i s
s e n s e t h a t we t e n d t o a g r e e w i t h T. A. Sebeok's r e c e n t a f f i r m a t i o n t h a t
t h e "germinal r61e of Kruszewski i s now eminently c l e a r " a s f a r a s h i s
39
i n f l u e n c e on S a u s s u r e i s concerned.
 3
FOOTNOTES - 1.3.3.2

* E. t r a n s l . : "As e a r l y a s i n h i s "0;erk", o v e r t h r e e d e c a d e s be-

f o r e [ t h e p u b l i c a t i o n o f ] t h e "Cours" o f S a u s s u r e , Kruszewski c l a i m e d
t h a t ' t h e word i s a s i g n of a n o b j e c t ' and t h a t ' l a n g u a g e i s n o t h i n g
else b u t a s y s t e m o f s i g n s ' . " (Loja, l968:237).

"Mikolaj Kruszewski, j e g o i y c i e i p r a c e naukowe", PF 2.3: 837-49,

and 3.1:116-75 (1888-89); r e p r . i n BdC, 1904:96-175, and i n Russ. t r a n s l .
b u t i n a n a b r i d g e d form i n BdC, 1963 I, 146-201. T h i s q u e s t i o n , among
o t h e r s , w i l l b e d i s c u s s e d i n o u r f o r t h c o m i n g a r t i c l e , "Miko3aj Habdank-
Kruszewski (1851-87): A B i o - B i b l i o g r a p h i c a l Survey on t h e O c c a s i o n o f
h i s 1 2 0 t h B i r t h d a y " , i n Linguistics.

Cf. BdC, 1963 I , 149 and 171.

R e g r e t t a b l y , t h i s a p p l i e s p a r t i c u l a r l y t o t h e two o t h e r w i s e v e r y
u s e f u l s t u d i e s which a p p e a r e d i n t h e West d u r i n g t h e p a s t few y e a r s ,
H. G. S c h o g t ' s p a p e r , "Baudouin d e Courtenay and P h o n o l o g i c a l A n a l y s i s " ,
Linguistique 2.1:15-29 ( 1 9 6 6 ) , pp. 16-7, and H z u s l e r t s monograph o n
Baudouin i n which h e makes o n l y p a s s i n g r e f e r e n c e s t o Kruszewski (1968:
1 0 , 11, 48-9, 51) and d o e s n o t i n c l u d e a s i n g l e p u b l i c a t i o n of t h i s
l i n g u i s t i n h i s e x t e n s i v e b i b l i o g r a p h y o f a l m o s t 300 i t e m s (1968:148-61).

"I. A. ~ o d u a nd e ~ u r t e n ai ego u E e n i e o jazyke", R J 29.2:87-93 ~

(1965), a t p. 87. L e o n t ' e v ' s c o n t e n t i o n c o n t r a s t s s h a r p l y w i t h r e c e n t
h i s t o r i e s o f l i n g u i s t i c s , e . g . 1vi6 and Graur/Wald ( b o t h o f 1 9 6 5 ) , and
L o j a and B e r e z i n ( b o t h o f 1 9 6 8 ) .

A n o t e w o r t h y e x c e p t i o n i s Arens (1969) who r e p r o d u c e s a few ex-

c e r p t s from K r u s z e w s k i ' s w r i t i n g s (pp. 359-61), b u t n o t from BdC, and
makes a few e x p l i c i t r e f e r e n c e s t o him ( s . pp. 329, 347, 362, and 4 5 8 ) ,
w h e r e a s BdC i s o n l y mentioned en passant (pp. 316, 329, 630 and 638).

Cf. " L ' i m p o r t a n z a d i Kruszewski p e r l o s v i l u p p o d e l l a linguistics

g e n e r a l e " , RSZav 13:3-23 (1965, b u t p u b l i s h e d i n 1 9 6 7 ) , i n p a r t i c u l a r
pp. 21-2; i t i s a p p a r e n t l y a n I t . a d a p t i o n o f h i s "Znaczenie Kruszewskiego
w rozwo j u j ezkoznaws twa og61nego" which a p p e a r e d i n Kruszewski, 1967 :
X-xxv .
RSZav 13:22 (1965[1967]) ; a s f o r t h e l a t t e r a s p e c t , s . e s p . ,
Zoc. c i t . , 1 2 .
 .
Cf t h e i n t r o d u c t o r y pages of chap. 1 . 3 . 3 and n . 4-7. In addition,
D r . R. Engler informed me i n p r a v a t e correspondence ( J u l y 29, 1971) t h a t
t h e r e e x i s t s a copy of Kruszewski's &er die Lautabwechslung w i t h t h e
d e d i c a t i o n "A M r l e p r o f e s s e u r Ferdinand d e Saussure" and n o t e s by FdS
h i m s e l f on pp. 1Of.of t h e monograph. It i s hoped t h a t a Xerox copy of
t h e s e pages can b e r e c e i v e d i n t i m e t o c o n s i d e r t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n f o r t h e
paper r e f e r r e d t o i n n o t e 1 of t h i s chap.

.
The i n d i v i d u a l s e c t i o n s of t h e G. t r a n s 1 , r e v i s e d by t h e a u t h o r
and l a t e r , a f t e r ~ r u s z e w s k i ' sm o r t a l i l l n e s s and d e a t h ( i n 1 8 8 7 ) , by
BdC and A. I. Aleksandrov, c a n b e found i n t h e f o l l o w i n g l o c a t i o n s :
1:295-307 (1884), 2:258-68 (1885), 3:145-87 (1887), and 5:133-44, 339 t o
360 (1890) . We s h a l l r e f e r t o t h e y e a r p l u s page i n t h e f o l l o w i n g .
10
S. T. De Mauro's s h o r t n o t e , "La b i b l i o t e c a d i Saussure", i n
De Mauro, 1968:361-2; h e r e p . 362.

For a b e a u t i f u l s t a t e m e n t of t h e p r i n c i p a l i d e a s of Kruszewski's
t h e o r y of a b l a u t , s. J. R. ~ i r t h ' sn o t e , "The Word h hone me"', W h o n
46:44-6 (1934); r e p r . i n F i r t h , 1957:l-2.

l2 The T u r k o l o g i s t Wilhelm Radlof f , a c o l l e a g u e and f r i e n d o i Kru-

szewski, who h e l p e d him i n t h e p r e p a r a t i o n of t h e G. v e r s i o n of t h i s
.
t r e a t i s e ( s Kruszewski, 1881: 1 ) , d i d n o t o n l y a p p l y Kruszewski I s t h e o r y
of a l t e r n a t i o n on t h e o c c a s i o n of t h e F i f t h I n t e r n . Congress of Orien-
t a l i s t s h e l d i n S e p t . 1881, b u t r e p o r t s a l s o t h e f o l l o w i n g i n t e r e s t i n g
background s t o r y a b o u t t h e f a t e of t h i s t r e a t i s e : ... d e r Verfasser
...
I'

[ i . e . Kruszewski] war l e i d e r gezwungen, d i e Abhandlung auf e i g e n e

Kosten i n Kasan zu drucken, denn e r v e r z w e i f e l t e , s i e i n e i n e r d e u t s c h e n
Z e i t s c h r i f t v e r S f f e n t l i c h e n zu kSnnen, da s i e ihm a u s L e i p z i g und KSnigs-
b e r g m i t dem Bemerken z u r i i c k g e s t e l l t wurde, d a s s d i e Abhandlung s i c h
mehr mi t MethodoZogie aZs mit Sprachwissenschaft b e s c h z f t i g e , " (Our
i t a l i c s ) . S . R a d l o f f ' s p a p e r , "Die L a u t a l t e r n a t i o n und i h r e Bedeutung
f 3 r d i e Sprachentwickelung, b e l e g t durch B e i s p i e l e aus den Tiirksprachen",
AbhandZungen des FZnften Internationalen Orientalisten-Congresses ( B e r l i n :
Asher, 1882) 111, 54-70; h e r e p. 58. BdC confirms t h i s when h e noted
i n 1881: "For t h e s a k e of c u r i o s i t y , I c o n s i d e r i t n o t e x c e s s i v e t o
mentlon h e r e t h a t t h e foreword [ i . e . t h e t h e o r e t i c a l i n t r o d u c t i o n of
h i s K voprosu o gune] t o t h i s work of ~ r u g e v s k i ji n i t s German v e r s i o n
could n o t b e accommodated i n t h e s p e c i a l German j o u r n a l s , probably be-
c a u s e t h e e x p r e s s i o n of new i d e a s i n t h e a r e a of s e v e r a l s c i e n c e s i s
t h e r e c o n s i d e r e d t h e p r i v i l e g e of p e o p l e b e l o n g i n g t o c e r t a i n c i r c l e s .
I n c i d e n t a l l y , i n t h e o p i n i o n of s e v e r a l s c h o l a r s , from such g e n e r a l -
i s a t i o n s n o t h i n g i s gained ('gewonnen w i r d ' ) (Archiv . S l a v i s c h e
.
P h i l o l o g i e V. 331) " (RFV 5 :339-40, n . 1 ) .
l3 C h a r a c t e r i s t i c a l l y , Kruszewski h a s chosen t h e f o l l o w i n g motto
from L e i b n i z f o r h i s Outline of 1883 ( i . e . t h e Russ. o r i g i n a l ) : "Das
Studium d e r Sprachen d a r f keineswegs von anderen Grundsztzen g e l e i t e t
werden, a l s d i e S t u d i e n d e r Wissenschaft iiberhaupt. Warum m i t dem Un-
bekannten s t a t t m i t dem Bekannten anfangen? W i r h a l t e n uns doch an d i e
Vernunft, wenn w i r m i t dem Studium d e r neuern Sprachen anheben." T h i s
q u o t a t i o n r e v e a l s ~ r u s z e w s k i ' s p r i n c i p l e s i n nuce: 1 ) t h e s t u d y of
language i s a [ f o r Kruszewski: n a t u r a l ] s c i e n c e , 2) t h e i n v e s t i g a t o r
h a s t o u s e i n d u c t i o n , and 3 ) l o g i c i s t h e governing p r i n c i p l e f o r
generalisations . (The term 'Logik' a p p e a r s i n Kruszewski, 1881: 7) .
14
Pp. 28-37 a r e t a k e n up by Kruszewski's d i s c u s s i o n of t h e neo-
grammarian d o c t r i n e s of analogy and t h e "Lautgesetz" - h y p o t h e s i s , com-
p a r i n g and c o n t r a s t i n g them w i t h h i s own i d e a s and p r i n c i p l e s . I n a n
appendix (38-41) h e d i s c u s s e s p a r t i c u l a r p h o n e t i c phenomena i n Old
Slavonic .
l5 T r a n s l a t e d from t h e P o l i s h o r i g i n a l i n BdC, 1904:134-5.

l6 I n h i s Prinzipien Kruszewski r e f e r s s e v e r a l times t o A System

of Logic, Ratiocinative and Inductive; Being a Connected View of the
Principles of Evidence and t h e Methods o f S c i e n t i f i c Investigation,
2 vols. (London: J . W. P a r k e r , 1843 [ 8 t h e d . , New York: Harper, 19001)
by John S t u a r t M i l l (1806-73), and t o Mental and Moral Science: A Com-
pendium of Psychology and Ethics, 2nd ed. (London: Longmans, 1868)
by Alexander Bain (1818-1903).

l7 Kruszewski r e f e r s t o S t e i n t h a l ' s Abriss der ~ ~ r a c h w i s s e n s c h a f t ,

2nd ed. ( B e r l i n : F. ~ b l e r 1, 8 8 1 ) , a book which f i r s t appeared under
t h e t i t l e Einleitung i n die Psychologie und Sprachwissenschaft i n 1871,
b u t a l s o ( a s P a u l d i d ) t o Studien iiber d i e SprachvorsteZZungen (Wien:
Braumcller, 1880) by Salomon S t r i c k e r (1834-98), a p h y s i o l o g i s t who
a t t e m p t e d t o p r o v e t h a t human speech i s accompanied by t h e i n d i v i d u a l ' s
awareness of muscular movements which h e l p him t o r e t a i n t h e a r t i c u l a t i o n s
of t h e sounds of a g i v e n language. (Cf. Kruszewski, 1884:301-2; f o r a
r e f . , s. Kruszewski, 1885:261, n . 2 ) .

l8 Cf. t h e f o l l o w i n g a f f i r m a t i o n by Kruszewski: "Die S p r a c h g e s e t z e

s i n d n u r m i t den b i o l o g i s c h e n Gesetzen, d.h. m i t den Gesetzen a l l e s
d e s s e n , was s i c h e n t w i c k e l t o d e r l e b t , v e r g l e i c h b a r . " (1885: 262, n. 2
[spaced i n t h e o r i g i n a l ] ) .
l9 Q u o t a t i o n s a r e taken.,from H . G. Bronn's G. t r a n s l . of C h a r l e s
Darwin's epoch-making book, Uber d i e Entstehung der Arten, 2nd r e v . ed.
( S t u t t g a r t : S c h w e i z e r b a r t , 1863).

20 Kruszewski r e f e r s e x p l i c i t l y t o M i l l ' s Logic f o r h i s p r i n c i p l e s

of a s s o c i a t i o n (1884:304, n . 1 ) ; Arens (1969:360, n . ) i s c o r r e c t i n a r g u i n g
t h a t t h e s e p r i n c i p l e s were f i r s t f o r m u l a t e d by David Hume (1748) and
David H a r t l e y (1749).
21
Apart from r e f e r e n c e s t o Brugmann, O s t h o f f , ~elbr:ck, S i e v e r s
and o t h e r s , Kruszewski makes f r e q u e n t r e f e r e n c e s t o P a u l ' s Prinzipien
(1885:262, n . 1 , 268, n . 1 ; 1887:145, n . 2 , 147, n.2, 161, n.1, 165, n .
1-2, 169, n . 1 , 175, n.1; 1890:139, n . 1 , 143, n.1, 344, n.1, 354, n . 3 ,
358, n . 3 ) .
 22
Kruszewski 's empiricism o b l i g e s him t o u s e t h e q u a l i f i e r s "unge-
f i h r " (1884:301) and "annghernd?' (1885: 262, and e s p . n. 2) .
23 Kruszewski adds: "Ich gebrauche das Wort [ i . e . Harmonie] n i c h t
i m m ~ s i ~ a l i s c h eSni n n e , sondern i n d e r Bedeutung von g e g e n s e i t i g e r An-
passung und Ausgleichung." (1884:301, n . 2 ) . On p. 303 h e u s e s "Sprache"
( i n s t e a d of "Dialekt") i n t h e same c o n t e x t ; a p p a r e n t l y Kruszewski employed
them a s synonymous terms.

24 "Der Laut w i r d an und f i i r s i c h i n d e r Sprache n i c h t a n g e t r o f f e n ,

h a t weder e i n e e i g e n e b e s t a n d i g e Funktion, noch i r g e n d e i n e n p s y c h i s c h e n
I n h a l t . " (1884: 259) .
25 Kruszewski adds i n a f n . t h a t h e u n d e r s t a n d s b o t h laws i n t h e
s e n s e of t h e E n g l i s h philosophy q u o t i n g t h e f o l l o w i n g p a s s a g e from M i l l :
I1
... i d e a s , o r secondary m e n t a l s t a t e s , a r e e x c i t e d by o u r i m p r e s s i o n s ,
o r by o t h e r i d e a s , a c c o r d i n g t o c e r t a i n laws which a r e c a l l e d Laws of
A s s o c i a t i o n . Of t h e s e laws t h e f i r s t i s , t h a t similar ideas t e n d t o
.
e x c i t e one a n o t h e r [ ~ n l i c h k e i t s a s s o c i a t i o n ] The second i s , t h a t when two
i m p r e s s i o n s have been f r e q u e n t l y e x p e r i e n c e d ( o r even thought o f ) e i t h e r
simZtaneousZy o r i n immediate succession, t h e n whenever one of t h e s e
i m p r e s s i o n s , o r t h e i d e a of i t o c c u r s , i t t e n d s t o e x c i t e t h e i d e a of t h e
o t h e r [Angrenzungsassociation, ... 1. The t h i r d law i s , t h a t g r e a t e r
i n t e n s i t y i n e i t h e r o r b o t h of t h e i m p r e s s i o n s i s e q u i v a l e n t , i n r e n d e r i n g
them e x c i t a b l e by one a n o t h e r , t o a g r e a t e r frequency of c o n j u n c t i o n . "
(1884: 304, n .l; G. terms a p p e a r t o have been added by Techmer) . Krus-
zewski does n o t g i v e a page r e f e r e n c e ; t h e q u o t a t i o n can b e found i n
M i l l ' s System of Logic, new i m p r e s s i o n (New York & London: Longmans,
1959, p . 557.

26 It would b e i n t e r e s t i n g t o know whether J . R. F i r t h who was

f a m i l i a r w i t h Kruszewski 's %er d i e Lautabwechslung ( c f F i r t h , 1957: .
1-2) had r e a d t h e o t h e r of Kruszewski's German p u b l i c a t i o n s a s w e l l
and d e r i v e d h i s concept of " c o l l o c a t i o n " from t h e P o l i s h l i n g u i s t .

27 These somewhat c u r i o u s views had been expressed by Kruszewski

a s e a r l y a s 1879 i n a p a p e r e n t i t l e d "Ob ' a n a l o g i i ' i 'narodnoj e t i -
m o l o g i i ' ('Volksetymologie')", RFV 2.3/4:109-22; P o l . t r a n s l . i n Krus-
zewski, 1967:3-12. BdC c r i t i c i z e d them i n h i s o b i t u a r y of 1888 ( c f .
BdC, l g O 4 : l l l f . ) .
28 ~ r u s z e w s k i ' smost e x p l i c i t s t a t e m e n t , which h a s a l s o been i n c l u d e d
by Arens i n h i s anthglogy (1969:360-l), runs a s f o l l o w s : Wenn d i e Wiirter
nach dem Gesetz der AhnZichkeitsassociation Systeme oder Familien i n
unserem Geiste bilden, so ordnen s i e sich nach dem Gesetze der Angren-
zungsassociation i n Reihen. J e d e s Wort i s t a l s o r n i t z w e i e r l e i q ~ von
t
Banden verkniipft: e s i s t nzmlich 1. r n i t u n z g h l i g e n Banden d e r Ahnlich-
k e i t r n i t Wartern verbunden, welche den L a u t e n , d e r S t r u k t u r und d e r
Bedeutung nach r n i t ihm verwandt s i n d , und 2. r n i t ebenso u n z z h l i g e n Banden
d e r Angrenzung r n i t s e i n e n v e r s c h i e d e n e n B e g l e i t e r n i n v e r s c h i e d e n e n
Redeweisen verbunden; ... " (1887: 1 7 2 ) .
 29 I n f a c t t h e CLG(E), 285 r e v e a l s t h a t t h e r e i s no t e x t u a l b a s i s
f o r t h i s s t a t e m e n t q u i t e s i m i l a r t o t h e o t h e r a f f i r m a t i o n i n t h e same
paragraph (CLG, 173) t h a t "il n ' y a r i e n d ' a b s t r a i t dans l a langue",
a c o n t e n t i o n q u i t e s i m i l a r t o CLG, 32 t h a t "langue n ' e s t p a s moins que l a
p a r o l e un o b j e t d e n a t u r e concri'te" ( c f . CLG(E), 44) which, however, i s
w e l l documented by s t u d e n t s ' n o t e s .

30 Kruszewski observed i n h i s e a r l i e r s t u d y : " ...

uns [ i s t ]
e i g e n t l i c h keine Thatsache der aZten Phonetik unmitteZbar zugZngZich:
jede !Thatsache muss inductiv f e s t g e s t e z l t werden." (1881:6).

31 Cf. h i s s t a t e m e n t : "Und w i r k l i c h , wenn d i e Sprache n i c h t s a n d r e s

a l s e i n Zeichensystem i s t , s o w i r d i h r i d e a l e r zustand n u r dann e n t s t e h e n ,
wenn zwischen dem System von Zeichen und dem, was d i e s e l b e n b e z e i c h n e n
s o l l e n , e i n e vollkommene Entsprechung s t a t t f i n d e t . " (1887:174; o u r
i t a l i c s ; a l s o quoted i n Arens, 1969:601).

32 He s t a t e d f o r i n s t a n c e : "Es g i b t Worttypen und den V o r s t e l l u n g s -

systemen e n t s p r e c h e n d e Systeme d i e s e r Typen. Die h e r v o r r a g e n d s t e n
Sys teme, d i e Deklination und Konjugation, s i n d schon l a n g e b e o b a c h t e t I' .
(1884:306). S i m i l a r l y , h e spoke of i r r e g u l a r developments of word systems
(1890:134), a f f i r m e d t h a t morphology " b i e t e t uns ... e i n e Menge von
andern Systemen d a r " (1890:340) o r r e f e r r e d t o " S p l i t t e r n von Systemen"
.
(357-8) t h u s S u g g e s t i n g what contemporary l i n g u i s t s ( e . g J . Vachek)
m a i n t a i n : language i s a system of systems.

33 That Kruszewski confused t h e s e two views of language c a n b e

g a t h e r e d from t h e f a c t t h a t h e d i d n o t c o n s i s t e n t l y u s e "Lautabwechslung",
i . e . a l t e r n a t i o n a s a s y n c h r o n i c term ( a s h i s 1881 s t u d y may h a v e sug-
g e s t e d ) , b u t a l s o i n t h e s e n s e of "Lautwandel", sound change, a s h e
emphasized h i m s e l f by s u g g e s t i n g t h e i r e q u a t i o n and i n t e r c h a n g e a b l e u s e
( s . 1887: 164, 1 6 5 ) .
34
To g i v e o n l y a few l o c a t i o n s i n which Kruszewski used t h e term
'System': 1884:301, 302, 303, 304, 305, 306, 307; 1885:262, 263, 268;
1887:148, 149, 157, 160, 161, 172, 174; 1890:134, 135, 137, 138, 139,
140, 339, 340, 341, 343, 344, 345, 358, 360.
35
On o c c a s i o n , however, one may f i n d an a f f i r m a t i o n of t h e f o l l o w i n g
kind: I' ... a l l e r Abweichungen u n g e a c h t e t , biZdet d i e Spr. [ a c h e ]
e i n harmonisches Ganxes." (1890:347). It should b e p o i n t e d o u t , however,
t h a t S i e v e r s made s i m i l a r remarks a s e a r l y a s i n 1876 i n h i s GrundzEge
.
der Lautphysiologie ( c f 1.1.3.2.3) .
36 Cf. FdS's a f f i r m a t i o n : "Le s i g n e l i n g u i s t i q u e e s t donc une
e n t i t 6 psychique 2 deux f a c e s " (CLG, 9 9 ) .

37 Kruszewski s t a t e d : "Das Wort h a t an und fiir s i c h i m a l l g e m e i n e n

keinen Zweck; e s i s t e i n Symbol, e i n S u b s t i t u t fiir e i n e I d e e , und e i n
Glied d i e s e r symbolischen Reihe, w i e e s d e r Laut i s t , t r i t t n i e s e l b -
s t z n d i g a u f . Dieses Paaren d e r I d e e m i t dem Lautkomplex i s t n i c h t s
a b s o l u t n o t w e n d i g e s , p r i m z r e s : i n d e r S p r a c h e d e r Taubstummen v e r b i n d e t
s i c h d i e s e l b e I d e e m i t d e r Gebzyde ( G e s t u s ) , i n d e r c h i n e s i s c h e n S p r a c h e
m i t dem s c h r i f t l i c h e n Z e i c h e n , e n d l i c h v e r b i n d e t s i c h i n v e r s c h i e d e n e n
S p r a c h e n e i n und d i e s e l b e I d e e m i t v e r s c h i e d e n e n Lautkomplexen. Das
Wort v e r d a n k t s e i n e Bedeutung a l s o n u r d e n Gesetzen der A ~ s o c i a t i o n ! ~
(1885:263-4). T h i s s t a t e m e n t c o n t a i n s a number of i n t e r e s t i n g p o i n t s .
The s e c o n d s e n t e n c e shows K . ' s a w a r e n e s s of t h e p o s s i b l e u n i o n of sound
(complex) and i d e a ( c o n c e p t ) , and h e a p p e a r s t o h a v e f o r m u l a t e d i n d i r e c t l y
t h e a r b i t r a r y n a t u r e of t h e i r combination.

38 Cf. K r u s z e w s k i ' s u s e of " M o t i v i e r u n g " (1890:142, n . 1 ) w i t h r e f .

t o 567, pp. 140-1, and FdS's c o n c e p t of " m o t i v a t i o n " (CLG, 180-4).

39 "Foreword" t o t h e Geneva School Reader, p . v i i i ( 1 9 6 9 ) .

1.3.4 The Humboldtian T r a d i t i o n i n Nineteenth-Century L i n g u i s t i c s
I

Wilhelm von Hwnboldt was one of the pro-

foundest thinkers on general l i n g u i s t i c
questions i n the nineteenth century, and
one wonders whether, i f h i s s t y l e had been
l e s s d i f f u s e and h i s ideas more worked out
a d exemplified than they were, and h i s
volwninous m r k s were b e t t e r known and more
widely read, he would not be accorded a
position nearer t o t h a t given t o de Saussure
as one of the founders of modern l i n g u i s t i c
thought.

Robert H. Robins (1967: 174)

1.3.4.1 A Brief Survey of Humboldtian Trends at t h e Turn of t h e

C entury

I n 1894 Brugmann complained t h a t " d i e von W. von Humboldt inaugu-

r i e r t e S p r a c h p h i l o s o p h i e war i n d e r Hand e i n i g e r h e r v o r r a g e n d e r Indo-
germanisten n i c h t i n g l i i c k l i c h e r P f l e g e . " (JAOS 19:77), Brugmann's com-
p l a i n t a p p e a r s t o b e c u r i o u s i f n o t u n j u s t i f i e d t o anyone who i s some-
what more a c q u a i n t e d w i t h t h e v a r i o u s t r e n d s of l i n g u i s t i c t h o u g h t i n
t h e 1 9 t h c e n t u r y , a n i n s i g h t which contemporary h i s t o r i e s of l i n g u i s t i c s
do n o t p r o v i d e . Indeed t h e r e h a s been throughout t h e second h a l f of t h e
1 9 t h c e n t u r y t o t h e p r e s e n t t i m e a n u n i n t e r r u p t e d t r a d i t i o n d e r i v i n g from
Humboldt's i d e a s , and t h i s c a n b e most r e a d i l y p e r c e i v e d i n German l i n -
1
g u i s t i c scholarship.
I n 1847 Max S c h a s l e r ( 1 8 1 9 - 1 9 0 3 ) ~ v e n t u r e d t o p u b l i s h a q u i t e m i s -
l e a d i n g and s p u r i o u s a c c o u n t of Wilhelm von ~ u m b o l d t ' s (1767-1835) p o s t -
humous Einleitung t o t h e voluminous t r e a t i s e on t h e Kawi language of
~ a v a o, n~l y t o b e met by a s h a r p r e p l y from Heymann S t e i n t h a l (1823-99)
who was t h e n twenty-f i v e y e a r s o l d . 4 A s e a r l y a s 1850 S t e i n t h a l had pub-
l i s h e d a monograph on language c l a s s i f i c a t i o n i n t h e Humboldtian s p i r i t
which was t h e f i r s t i m p o r t a n t s t e p towards h i s well-known Charakteristik
der hauptstichlichen Typen des Sprachbaues of 1860 and which appeared
i n a much r e v i s e d and e n l a r g e d e d i t i o n , p r e p a r e d by h i s p u p i l and younger
c o l l e a g u e Franz M i s t e l i (1841-1903), about a g e n e r a t i o n l a t e r . I n 1882
S t e i n t h a l o u t l i n e d i n h i s Zeitschrift fi2r V5ZkerpsychoZogie und Sprach-
wissenschaft t h e manner i n which h e i n t e n d e d t o p u b l i s h t h e t h e o r e t i c a l
("sprachphilosophisch") works of Humboldt, some of which had n o t been
p u b l i s h e d b e f o r e ; 6 and i n 1884 an i m p r e s s i v e volume of about 700 pages
7
appeared.
Apart from S t e i n t h a l and h i s c o l l a b o r a t o r s , M i s t e l i and i n p a r t i c u l a r ,
M o r i t z Lazarus (1824-1903), another important f i g u r e i n 1 9 t h century l i n -
g u i s t i c s d e s e r v e s t o b e mentioned (whom Brugrnann might have had i n mind
when h e r e f e r r e d t o "some e x c e l l e n t Indo-Europeanists"): August F r i e d r i c h
P o t t (1802-87), " a u t e u r d'immenses t r a v a u x 6tymologiques que personne
ne lit plus, bien 2 t o r t " a s a s t u d e n t n o t e d i n 1908 from S a u s s u r e ' s
l e c t u r e s (CLG(E), 7 ) . P o t t , who p u b l i s h e d a l o n g i n t r o d u c t i o n t o g e n e r a l
8
l i n g u i s t i c s from 1884 onwards i n F. Techmer's InternationaZe Zeitschrift
fiir AZZgemeine Sprachwissenschaft, e d i t e d Humboldt's famous EinZeitung
f o r t y y e a r s a f t e r i t had appeared i n p r i n t f o r t h e f i r s t t i m e t o g e t h e r w i t h
a very e x t e n s i v e a n a l y s i s of Humboldt's l i n g u i s t i c thought.' It s h o u l d b e
p o i n t e d o u t t h a t P o t t , whose EtymoZogische Forschungen of 1 0 volumes i n
a l l i n t h e second e d i t i o n were completed i n 1876 and provided m a t e r i a l
f o r t h e young l i n g u i s t s a t L e i p z i g , was soon i g n o r e d by them, a f a t e h e
s h a r e d w i t h a number of o t h e r l i n g u i s t s a t L e i p z i g and o t h e r c e n t r e s of
l i n g u i s t i c a c t i v i t y i n Western Europe d u r i n g t h e l a s t q u a r t e r of t h e 1 9 t h
century. I n t h i s c o n n e c t i o n mention s h o u l d b e made of t h e a c t i v i t i e s
c e n t r e d around F r i e d r i c h Techmer (1843-91) and h i s Zeitschrift which
r e g r e t t a b l y (owing t o t h e ~ d i t o r ' sp r e m a t u r e d e a t h ) appeared o n l y from
1884 t o 1890. T h i s j o u r n a l which was p u b l i s h e d i n L e i p z i g ( a f a c t which
might b e of some s i g n i f i c a n c e ) n o t o n l y c o n s t i t u t e d , a s would appear now,
a forum f o r d i s s e n t and o p p o s i t i o n t o t h e neogrammarian movement w i t h an
i n t e r n a t i o n a l a p p e a l (many a r t i c l e s b e i n g w r i t t e n i n French and E n g l i s h )
and f o r l i n g u i s t s from o u t s i d e Germany who might o t h e r w i s e n o t always
have b e e n h e a r d t h e r e ( e . g . J e s p e r s e n , Kruszewski, La G r a s s e r i e , and
o t h e r s ) , b u t a l s o a p l a c e which f o s t e r e d Humboldtian i d e a s t o g e t h e r w i t h
t h e i n v e s t i g a t i o n of non-Indo-European languages, v i z . the publications
of P o t t , M i s t e l i , G. von d e r Gabelentz; t h e s e c o n s t i t u t e d an obvious
counter-movement t o t h e p r e d i l e c t i o n s of t h e J u n g g r m a t i k e r .
I t might b e of some i n t e r e s t Lo t h e h i s t o r y of l i n g u i s t i c s t o cleinon-
s t r a t e t h e i n f l u e n c e Humboldt's i d e a s had o u t s i d e Germany i n t h e 1 9 t h
century. D a n i e l G a r r i s o n B r i n t o n (1837-99), f o r example, t r i e d t o pro-
p a g a t e Hwnboldtian philosophy of language i n ~ m e r i c a , " and James Byrne
(1820-97) developed Humboldtian l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y f u r t h e r i n h i s voluminous
Genera2 Principles of the Structure of Language which appeared i n England
i n t h e same year.11 Baudouin d e Courtenay and A. A. P o t e b n j a (1835-91)
c o n t r i b u t e d t o t h e d i f f u s i o n of Humboldtian l i n g u i s t i c thought i n E a s t e r n
Europe a s Lucien Adam (1833-1918), Raoul d e La G r a s s e r i e (1839-1914),
and o t h e r s d i d i n France. These a r e o n l y a few examples, and many more
could b e added t o t h e l i s t , b u t t h e few mentioned above, a l o n g w i t h t h e
c u r r e n t r e v i v a l of i n t e r e s t i n Humboldt, s u g g e s t t h a t a re-assessment of
h i s views would c o n s t i t u t e an i m p o r t a n t p a r t i n t h e h i s t o r y of 1 9 t h c e n t u r y
l i n g u i s t i c thought. I n a d d i t i o n , i t s h o u l d b e p o i n t e d o u t t h a t Max
Miiller (1823-1900), Whitney, and Franz Boas (1858-1942) w e r e f a m i l i a r w i t h
and i n d e e d t a u g h t ~ u m b o l d t ' s "Weltanschauungstheorie", Boas b e i n g t h e
13
m e d i a t o r and immediate s o u r c e of t h e s o - c a l l e d "Sapir-Whorf hypothesis".
For t h e p r e s e n t purpose i t i s s u f f i c i e n t t o r e f e r t o Germany t o
s u g g e s t t h a t t h e r e h a s been a c o n t i n u i t y i n t h e e x p l o i t a t i o n of i d e a s
concerning t h e n a t u r e of language put forward by Humboldt, and t h i s even
d u r i n g t h e t i m e when t h e neogrammarian d o c t r i n e was e x e r t i n g i t s s t r o n g e s t
impact. We would t h e r e f o r e draw a t t e n t i o n t o , b e s i d e s t h e work of S t e i n -
t h a l , M i s t e l i , P o t t , and o t h e r s which have a l r e a d y been mentioned, t h e
contributions t o psycho-linguistics by Kurt Bruchmann (1851-1928) who
p u b l i s h e d an a p p r e c i a t i o n of Humboldt i n 1887;14 i n a d d i t i o n t h e work of
Wundt, who from 1883 onwards e d i t e d t h e newly founded j o u r n a l Philosophische
Studien, played an i m p o r t a n t r $ l e i n t h e p r o p a g a t i o n of ~ u m b o l d t ' s concept
of " i n n e r e Sprachform" which Wundt t r i e d t o a n a l y z e on v a r i o u s o c c a s i o n s ,
i n p a r t i c u l a r i n h i s voluminous V82kerpsychoZogie ( 1 9 0 0 f f . ) . Early a t
t h e b e g i n n i n g of t h i s c e n t u r y A l b e r t Leitzmann e d i t e d ~ u m b o l d t ' s work,
t h e f i r s t s e v e n volumes of which c o n s t i t u t e d Humboldtrs l i n g u i s t i c and
p h i l o s o p h i c a l w r i t i n g s ; l5 a r t i c l e s d i s c u s s i n g i n p a r t i c u l a r ~ u m b o l d'ts
p h i l o s o p h i c a l views, i n c l u d i n g h i s i d e a s about language, followed soon
thereafter.'' Although i t may n b t b e q u i t e c o r r e c t t o a r g u e t h a t t h e
work of Humboldt "had provided Indo-European comparative grammar w i t h
i t s p h i l o s o p h i c a l b a s e s " (Lepschy, l 9 7 0 : 2 l ) , t h e r e i s every r e a s o n t o
b e l i e v e t h a t Humboldt's i d e a s concerning t h e g e n e r a l n a t u r e of language,
h i s a t t e m p t s a t language typology and c l a s s i f i c a t i o n a s w e l l a s h i s s e a r c h
f o r t h e dynamic s o u r c e of s p e e c h , t h e "Sprachgeist", d i d n o t f a i l t o make
t h e i r i m p r e s s i o n on t h e minds of t h e neogrammarians and indeed on no l e s s
a p e r s o n t h a n H. P a u l , a s could b e shown from h i s ~ r i n z i p i e n . ' ~ Contrary
t o many s u g g e s t i o n s from v a r i o u s s i d e s which De Mauro h a s l i s t e d r e c e n t l y
(1968:354) t h e r e i s no i n d i c a t i o n of a d i r e c t i n f l u e n c e by Humboldt on
~ a u s s u r el8
. That n e i t h e r S a u s s u r e ' s Zangue/paroZe dichotomy n o r h i s
c o n t r a s t between synchrony and diachrony can b e f i t t e d i n t o ~ u m b o l d t ' s
d i s t i n c t i o n between e r g o n and e n e r g e i a seems t o have now been c l e a r l y
19
demonstrated once and f o r a l l by Hugo M u e l l e r .
A l l t h i s does n o t mean t h a t Humboldtian i d e a s c o u l d have had
mutatis mutandis, e n t e r e d S a u s s u r e ' s l i n g u i s t i c t h o u g h t . In fact the
work o f b o t h Georg von d e r Gabelentz (1840-93) and Franz Nikolaus Finck
(1867-1910), n o t s o much t h a t p a r t d e a l i n g w i t h e x o t i c languages and
l i n g u i s t i c typology b u t more s o t h a t concerned w i t h g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c
problems, w i t h which S a u s s u r e was f a m i l i a r , may w e l l have been i n f l u e n t i a l
i n t r a n s m i t t i n g Humboldtian i d e a s w i t h i n t h e domain of g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s .
It i s moreover w i t h r e g a r d t o t h e p o s s i b l e i n f l u e n c e of t h e i r work on
S a u s s u r e t h a t t h e i r g e n e r a l p r i n c i p l e s of l i n g u i s t i c s w i l l be dissected
i n t h e following s e c t i o n s .
R e c e n t l y , Robert Lee M i l l e r s k e t c h e d o u t t h e p r i n c i p a l i d e a s of
Humboldt 's philosophy of languageY2O and from what we g a t h e r from h i s
monograph, h e i s s u g g e s t i n g t h a t t h e r e a r e a number of Humboldtian t e n e t s
which a p p e a r t o have been adopted by S a u s s u r e . According t o M i l l e r ,
S a u s s u r e " e x p r e s s l y r e a f f i r m e d some of Humboldt's c o n c e p t i o n s of language"
(1968:38) when h e s t a t e d t h a t from a p s y c h o l o g i c a l p o i n t of view human
t h o u g h t c o n s t i t u t e s a s h a p e l e s s and i n d i s t i n c t mass and t h a t n o t h i n g i s
d i s t i n c t p r i o r t o t h e appearance of language ( c f . CLG, 155-7); t h i s is
d e m o n s t r a t e d by S a u s s u r e ' s comparison of language w i t h a s h e e t of p a p e r ,
one s i d e of which r e p r e s e n t s thought and t h e o t h e r sound, t h u s a d v o c a t i n g
t h e i n s e p a r a b i l i t y of t h e s e two k n t i t i e s (CLG, 157) .21 M i l l e r quotes
t h e r e l e v a n t p a s s a g e s from t h e Cows a t some l e n g t h and e n v i s a g e s s i m i -
l a r i t i e s (which simply do n o t e x i s t ) between Humboldt's views and t h o s e
of S a u s s u r e , e s p e c i a l l y where S a u s s u r e s u g g e s t s t h a t language could b e
c a l l e d t h e domain of a r t i c u l a t i o n s (CLG, 156) . 2 2 He f a i l s t o s e e t h a t
S a u s s u r e had something q u i t e d i f f e r e n t i n mind when h e s t a t e d t h a t t h e
c h a r a c t e r i s t i c r z l e of language w i t h r e s p e c t t o thought i s t o s e r v e a s a
Zink between thought and sound and n o t t o c r e a t e a m a t e r i a l phonic means
f o r t h e e x p r e s s i o n of i d e a s ({bid.). For Humboldt language i s t h e f o r -
m a t i v e organ of thought and i d e n t i c a l w i t h i t b e c a u s e i t r e n d e r s t h e
i n t e r n a l and p s y c h i c a c t i v i t y of t h e mind e x t e r n a l and p e r c e p t i b l e through
t h e sounds of s p e e c h . 2 3 M i l l e r i g n o r e s S a u s s u r e ' s concept of t h e a r b i -
t r a r y n a t u r e of t h e c o n n e c t i o n between signifiant and signifig t o n o t e :
"As Humboldt b e f o r e him had done, S a u s s u r e s t r e s s e s t h e s y s t e m a t i c charac-
ter of l i n g u i s t i c s i g n s ; i n doing s o h e [FdS] i n t r o d u c e s t h e concept of
v a l u e " (1968:40) t h u s s u g g e s t i n g t h a t S a u s s u r e owes h i s i n s i g h t s t o Hum-
b o l d t w i t h o u t r e a l l y p r o v i d i n g any convincing t e x t u a l e v i d e n c e . We s h a l l
s e e i n t h e f o l l o w i n g c h a p t e r s s i m i l a r a t t e m p t s t o p r o v e S a u s s u r e ' s depen-
dence upon and marked i n f l u e n c e by o t h e r l i n g u i s t s of t h e Humboldtian
t r a d i t i o n which a r e f r e q u e n t l y very m i s l e a d i n g b e c a u s e t h e a d v o c a t e s
conclude from c e r t a i n s u p e r f i c i a l s i m i l a r i t i e s "evidence" f o r t h e i r pre-
conceived c o n v i c t i o n s and b a s e t h e i r assumptions on p a s s a g e s t a k e n o u t
of c o n t e x t , b o t h h i s t o r i c a l l y and e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l l y .
 FOOTNOTES - 1.3.4.1

1
S i n c e our concern i s w i t h t h e l i n g u i s t i c s p r i o r t o t h e appearance
of t h e CLG i n 1916 i t may s u f f i c e t o l i s t a number of t h e neo-Humboldtians
of t h e o l d e r g e n e r a t i o n , e . g . Hermann G c n t e r t (1886-1948), Eugen Lerch
(1888-1952), Walter P o r z i g (1895-1961), J o s t T r i e r (1894-1970), Johannes
Leo Weisgerber (1899- ), and Walther von Wartburg (1888- ) , a s w e l l a s
of t h e younger g e n e r a t i o n , e . g . Hennig Brinkmann, Helmut Gipper, Hans
G l i n z , E r n s t L e i s i , and o t h e r s .
L
Die EZemente der phiZosophischen Sprachwissenschaft WiZheZm von
HumboZdts ( B e r l i n : Trautwein, 1 8 4 7 ) .

&er d i e Verschiedenheit des menschtichen Spmchbaues und ihren

EinfZuss auf d i e geistige EntmickeZung des MenschengeschZechts ( B e r l i n :
F . Diimmler, 1836); f a c s i m i l e r e p r . Bonn: i b i d . , 1960; a n o t h e r ed., pre-
pared by H e r b e r t N e t t e , appeared i n 1949 (Darmstadt: C l a a s s e n & R o e t h e r ) .

Die Sprachwissenschaft WiZh. v. Hwnboldts und die HegeZsche Phito-

sophie ( B e r l i n : F . D i i m l e r , 1 8 4 8 ) .

1st ed. ( B e r l i n : F. Diimmler, 1860); 2nd r e v . e d . , ( i b i d . , 1893).

6 I,
P r o g r a m zu e i n e r neuen kusgabe d e r s p r a c h p h i l o s o p h i s c h e n Werke
Wilhems von Humboldt", ZfllPs 13:201-32; pp. 211-32 p r i n t f o r t h e f i r s t
t i m e an u n f i n i s h e d e s s a y of Humboldt 's .
Die Sprachphi Zosophischen Werke W i lhe Zm ' s von HumboZdt ( B e r l i n :
F. Diimmler, 1884). A f t e r a s h o r t p r e f a c e (1-5) and a d e s c r i p t i o n of
t h e m a n u s c r i p t s (7-11) S t e i n t h a l g i v e s a g e n e r a l i n t r o d u c t i o n t o Humboldt's
p h i l o s o p h i c a l i d e a s about language (13-21) and a n a l y z e s h i s s t y l e (23-34)
b e f o r e r e p r o d u c i n g t h e most i m p o r t a n t of Humboldt's t r e a t i s e s p u b l i s h e d
between 1820 and 1836 t o g e t h e r w i t h an i n t r o d u c t i o n t o each i n d i v i d u a l
work.

" E i n l e i t u n g i n d i e a l l g e m e i n e ~ p r a c h w i s s e n s c h at",
f IZAS 1:1-29,
329-54 (1884); 2:54-115, 209-51 (1885); 3:llO-26, 249-75 (1887); 4:67-96
(1889), and 5:3-18 (1890). See a l s o P o t t ' s Zur Litteratur der Sprach-
kunde Emopas (= Supplement t o IZAS, 1 ) ( L e i p z i g : J . A. B a r t h , 1 8 8 7 ) ,
e s p . pp. 95-111 i n which h e a t t a c k s t h e neogramrnarians.

&er die Verschiedenheit des menschzichen Sprachbaues von ...

Wilh. von Hwnboldt, ed. and w i t h an i n t r o d u c t i o n , "Wilhelm von Humboldt
und d i e Sprachwissenschaft", by A. F. P o t t ( B e r l i n : S. Calvary, 1 8 7 6 ) ,
ccccxx 4- 544 pp.
 lo The Philosophic Grammar of American Languages, as S e t Forth by
WiZheZm von Hwllboldt ( P h i l a d e l p h i a : McCalla & S t a v e l y , 1 8 8 5 ) ; see a l s o
F. Techmer's comment i n t h i s and' o t h e r of B r i n t o n ' s books i n IZAS 3:
306-8 (1887).

2 v o l s . (London: T r c b n e r , 1 8 8 5 ) ; c f . Techmer, Zoc. c i t . , 314-5;

2nd e d . (London: P a u l , Trench & T r z b n e r , 1 8 9 2 ) .

l2 S t a t e m e n t s of t h e f o l l o w i n g k i n d which s t i l l seem t o b e c h a r a c -
t e r i s t i c o f contemporary h i s t o r i e s of l i n g u i s t i c s would t h e n h a v e t o
b e r e j e c t e d as u t t e r l y m i s l e a d i n g : ...
If Humboldt n ' a p a s e u d e d i s -
c i p l e e t l ' o e u v r e d e l i n g u i s t i q u e g & & a l e q u ' i l a v a i t 6bauch6e n e f u t
r e p r i s e q u e t r o i s q u a r t s d e s i s c l e p l u s t a r d . E t p u i s S a u s s u r e est venu
e t a v e c l u i l ' e s p r i t d e s y n t h s s e , l a r i g e u r du r a i s o n n e m e n t , l a c l a r t 6
des vues ... 11
, e t c . - t h u s M. Leroy on t h r e e [ s i c . ] o c c a s i o n s : 1 )
" ~ 6 f l e x i o n s s u r 1' h i s t o i r e d e l a l i n g u i s t i q u e " , Omagiu R o s e t t i , 471-3
( l 9 6 5 ) , a t p . 472; 2) "Le b i n a r i s m e , c o n c e p t moteur d e l a l i n g u i s t i q u e " ,
~ZZangesde Zinguistique ... o f f e r t s 2 Ben5 FohaZZe (Gembloux: D u c u l o t ,
1 9 6 9 ) , 3-18, a t pp. 8-9, and 3) L e r o y , 1971:37; c f . o u r f o r t h c o m i n g
r e v i e w of t h e l a t t e r i n GL.

.
l3 Cf H. H . C h r i s t m a n n ' s i n o r m a t i v e s t u d y , Beitrzge zur Geschichte
der !7'hese vom WeZtbiZd der Sprache (Wiesbaden: F . S t e i n e r , 1 9 6 7 ) , e s p .
pp. 10-12.

l4 Wilhelm von Hwr6oZdt (Hamburg: J . F . R i c h t e r , 1 8 8 7 ) , 36 pp.

l5 WitheZm von H d o Z d t s G e s m e Z t e Schriften, 1 2 v o l s ( B e r l i n : .

B . Behr, lgO3-14), v o l s . 13-17 a p p e a r e d u n t i l 1936; a l l 17 v o l s . h a v e
b e e n r e p r i n t e d ( B e r l i n : W. d e G r u y t e r , 1967-68).

l6Cf. f o r example Eduard S p r a n g e r , 'Wilhelm von Humboldt und Kant",

Kantstudien 1 3 : 5 7 f f . ( l g O 8 ) , and Adolf Harnack, " L e i b n i z und Wilhelm von
'Humboldt", Preussische Jahrbiicher, No. 140 ( 1 9 1 0 ) . It may b e added t h a t
Humboldt's i d e a s a b o u t t h e n a t u r e o f l a n g u a g e h a v e a t t r a c t e d many non-
l i n g u i s t s w i t h a s p e c i f i c p h i l o s o p h i c a l i n t e r e s t as i s i l l u s t r a t e d f o r
i n s t a n c e by E r n s t C a s s i r e r ' s (1874-1945) work. It i s o f some h i s t o r i c a l
s i g n i f i c a n c e t h a t B e r t h o l d ~ e l b r c c kwho had d e v o t e d o n l y a few p a r a g r a p h s
t o Humboldt's p e r s o n a l i t y i n t h e 1st e d . of h i s EinZeitung i n das Sprach-
studiwn ( L e i p z i g : B r e i t k o p f & Hsrtel, 1880) i g n o r i n g ~ u m b o l d t ' s l i n g u i s t i c
i d e a s c o m p l e t e l y (op. c i t . , 26-7), added, s i n c e h e b e l i e v e d i t t o b e
a p p r o p r i a t e ( c f . p r e f a c e , v i ) , a l a r g e s e c t i o n o f Humboldt's v i e w s a b o u t
l a n g u a g e i n t h e 4 t h e d . of h i s EinZeitung (1904:41-55).

l7 S e e h i s Prinzipien der Sprachgeschichte ( H a l l e I S : Niemeyer , .

1 8 8 0 ) , pp. 6 8 f . w h e r e P a u l r e f e r s e x p l i c i t l y t o ~ u m b o l d t ' s a s s e r t i o n t h a t
s p e a k i n g i s " e i n immerwghrendes S c h a f f e n " . ( T h i s p a s s a g e i s p r i n t e d on
pp. 1 0 9 f . of t h e 4 t h and s u b s e q u e n t e d i t i o n s ) . However, Humboldt's i n -
f l u e n c e on P a u l i s f a i r l y m a r g i n a l a s Leonhard J o s t had t o concede; c f .
h i s Sprache aZs Werk und wirkende Kraft: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der
energetischen Sprachauffassung s e i t WiZheZm von HwnboZdt (Berne: P . Haup t ,
1 9 6 0 ) , 94-100 (on P a u l ) , and, a f t e r h i s a t t e m p t a t i n t e r p r e t i n g P a u l ' s
u s e of t h e term "Sprechtgtigkeitl: a s i n d i c a t i n g h i s indebtedness t o
~ r n b o l d t ' s energeia c o n c e p t i o n of l a n g u a g e , J o s t ' s meagre c o n c l u s i o n
(P* 99).

l8Humboldt was mentioned by FdS o n l y i n p a s s i n g ( c f . CLG(E) 3)

i n h i s l e c t u r e s on g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s . R. E n g l e r k i n d l y p r o v i d e d us
(through p r i v a t e correspondence) w i t h a n o t e taken by Louis C a i l l e i n
1907 i n FdS's c o u r s e which h a s n o t b e e n i n c l u d e d i n t h e CLG(E) ( c f .
p. 21) : "G. de Hwnboldt. C'est p r e s q u e 5 c e p o i n t d e v u e e t h n o l o g i q u e
q u e G. d e Humboldt s e p l a c e d a n s ses i d g e s p h i l o s o p h i q u e s s u r l a s t r u c -
t u r e des langues du globe. Le fond d e s e s t r a v a u x a pour b u t d t 6 t a b l i r
l e s r a p p o r t s d e l a l i n g u i s t i q u e a v e c l a l o g i q u e . Mais l ' i m p u l s i o n a 6t6
.
donnge p a r ses g t u d e s e t h n o l o g i q u e s I '

l9 S e e h i s p a p e r , "On Re-reading von Humboldt", MSLL 19:97-107

' ( 1 9 6 6 ) , i n p a r t i c u l a r pp. 99-102.

20 The Linguistic R e l a t i v i t y Principle and Humbo t d t i a n Ethno l i n -

q u i s t k : A History and Appraisal (The Hague: Mouton, 1 9 6 8 ) .
21 C f . Miller's b r i e f o u t l i n e o f (what h e b e l i e v e s t o b e t h e r e l e -
v a n t ) a s p e c t s o f Humboldt's l i n g u i s t i c p h i l o s o p h y , op. c i t . , 26-34, b u t
a l s o t h e meagre a c c o u n t o f FdS, i b i d . , 38-41.

22 As e a r l y as 1805 August F e r d i n a n d B e r n h a r d i (1770-1820), whose

l i n g u i s t i c i d e a s i n f l u e n c e d Humboldt c o n s i d e r a b l y , s t a t e d i n h i s An-
fangsgriinde der Sprachwissenschaft: " D a s j e n i g e Ganze von a r t i k u l i e r t e n
L a u t e n , d u r c h w e l c h e s d e r Mensch s e i n e Vors t e l l u n g e n d a r s t e l l t , h e i s s t
Sprache". C f . ~ e l b r k k ,EinZeitung i n das Studium der indogermnischen
Sprachen, 4 t h r e v . e d . ( L e i p z i g : B r e i t k o p f & H z r t e l , 1 9 0 4 ) , p. 46.
23 S e e t h e s t a t e m e n t i n Humboldt's Einleitung q u o t e d i n M i l l e r ,
p. 26.
1.3.4.2 Georg von d e r Gabelentz and His S u g g e s t i o n s Concerning
t h e General Study of ~ a n g u a g e .

. . . Hans Georg Conon von der GABELEWTZ

. . . fu specialmente sinoZogo . . . ;
ma fu anche gZottoZogo generaze d i
g r a d e valore ed i Z suo voZume: Die
Sprachwissenschaft, ..
. , ad onta
deZ tempo passato, 2 ancora uno d e i
migtiori t e s t i d i Zinguistica generaze.
C a r l o T a g l i a v i n i (1963:163)

IZ e s t d i f f i c i Z e en e f f e t , q u a d on
r e l i t aujourd 'hui Za Zinguis tique du
pass6, d '&happer h Z '6cZairage que Zes
connaissances actueZZes projettent h
revers sur Zes formuZations d 'autre-
fois; d i f f i c i l e de r 6 s i s t e r 2 c e t t e
impression saisissante des v i e w t e x t e s
apparaissant come 'pr6monitoires ',
d i f f i c i Z e de cornbattre Ze sentiment
qu 'on apercoit partout dzs pr6curseurs.
Georges Mounin i n 1959 (TIL 4:8)

1.3.4.2.1 GabeZentz ' s Limited Recognition i n the History of Linguistics

Georg von d e r Gabelentz (1840-93), son of t h e i m p o r t a n t i n v e s t i -

g a t o r of v a r i o u s I n d o n e s i a n and P o l y n e s i a n languages, Hans Conon von d e r
Gabelentz (1807-74) a f f o r d s a s t r i k i n g example of a l i n g u i s t whose
i d e a s m e r i t a t t e n t i o n and y e t h a s been i g n o r e d by many of h i s contem-
p o r a r i e s and almost completely by subsequent g e n e r a t i o n s of l i n g u i s t s .
Thus h e i s s t i l l n o t i n c l u d e d i n many r e c e n t s t u d i e s devoted t o t h e
2 3
h i s t o r y of l i n g u i s t i c t h o u g h t , mentioned en passant i n some, and only
t e n t a t i v e l y recognized by a few other^.^ That h e h a s o n l y r e c e n t l y b e e n
r e d i s c o v e r e d and recognized a s a f o r e r u n n e r of modern s t r u c t u r a l i s m ,
e.g. C o s e r i u ( 1 9 5 8 f f . ) , Zwirner ( 1 9 6 4 f f . ) , and Rensch ( 1 9 6 6 f . ) , i s sur-
p r i s i n g i f we n o t e t h a t Leo S p i t z e r s t a t e d i n 1918 t h a t S a u s s u r e ' s langue/
parole d i s t i n c t i o n had been a n t i c i p a t e d i n Gabelenie (1901: 591, that
J e s p e r s e n acknowledged i n h i s famous Language of 1922 ( c f . J e s p e r s e n ,
1964:98) t h a t h e owed more t o t h e work on g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s of Gabelentz
t h a n t o any o t h e r l i n g u i s t , and t h a t Hjelmslev r e f e r r e d t o G a b e l e n t z ' s
Sprachuissenschaft a s f r e q u e n t l y a s t o t h e works of S a p i r (1921) and
S a u s s u r e i n h i s Principes de linguistigue gSnkraZe.6 I n 1948 A. Reich-
l i n g s u g g e s t e d t h a t S a u s s u r e might w e l l have been i n luenced by Gabe-
l e n t z , and f o u r y e a r s l a t e r L. C . Michels c a l l e d Gabelentz a f o r e r u n n e r
7
of s t r u c t u r a l l i n g u i s t i c s , i n c l u d i n g phonology.
A few r e a s o n s may b e c i t e d which we b e l i e v e would e x p l a i n t h e l a c k
of r e c o g n i t i o n Gabelentz r e c e i v e d from h i s contemporaries i n Germany.
Gabelentz had s t u d i e d l i n g u i s t i c s and law a t t h e u n i v e r s i t i e s of J e n a
and L e i p z i g and f i r s t t u r n e d toward t h e l a t t e r s u b j e c t . However, h e
dropped h i s c a r e e r as a lawyer i n 1878 when h e was i n v i t e d t o fill t h e
newly e s t a b l i s h e d c h a i r of East-Asian languages a t L e i p z i g where h e t a u g h t
u n t i l h i s appointment t o t h e c h a i r of East-Asian languages and g e n e r a l
l i n g u i s t i c s (!) a t B e r l i n i n 1889. Contrary t o what E. Zwirner h a s r e -
c e n t l y claimed, t h e r e i s no e v i d e n c e t h a t Gabelentz t o o k an a c t i v e p a r t
i n t h e junggrommatische Richtung which came t o world-wide r e c o g n i t i o n
during h i s t e n u r e a t I,eipzig. * Gabelentz, who f i r s t d i s t i n g u i s h e d h i m s e l f
through h i s Chinesische Grammatik ( L e i p z i g , 1881), c o n c e n t r a t e d h i s
e f f o r t s on non-Indo-European languages i n s h a r p c o n t r a s t t o t h e neo-
grammarians and t h e i r adherents.' I n a d d i t i o n Gabelentz was v e r y i n -
t e r e s t e d i n g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c problems d e r i v i n g from i d e a s o u t l i n e d i n
Humboldt's work ( c f . 1 . 3 . 4 ) , a n endeavour which must have appeared ana-
c h r o n i s t i c i n t h e "unphilosophisches Z e i t a l t e r " , a s P a u l a p t l y charac-
t e r i z e d t h e g e n e r a l i n t e l l e c t u a l t r e n d of t h a t t i m e i n t h e opening para-
graph o f h i s Prinzipien i n 1880." The r e c e n t i n t e r e s t i n t h e g e n e r a l
l i n g u i s t i c work of Gabelentz i s c e r t a i n l y due t o a change i n a t t i t u d e
towards language s t u d y which h a s r e s u l t e d i n t h e emphasis b e i n g on t h e o r y
r a t h e r t h a n on d a t a and which h a s t a k e n p l a c e d u r i n g t h e s i x t i e s l a r g e l y
due t o Chomsky's work. One n o t e s w i t h s u r p r i s e t h a t t h e r e c e n t r e d i s c o v e r y
of Gabelentz h a s o c c u r r e d p r i n c i p a l l y i n Germany where h i s work i n gen-
e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s was i g n o r e d f o r balmost t h r e e g e n e r a t i o n s of l i n g u i s t s .

1.3.4.2.2 Gabe Zentz ' s Princip Zes of General Linguistics

I n view of t h e v a r i o u s c l a i m s t h a t h a v e been made by R e i c h l i n g ,

Michels, C o s e r i u , Zwirner, Rensch, and o t h e r s r e g a r d i n g G a b e l e n t z ' s
i n f l u e n c e on S a u s s u r e , i t i s i m p e r a t i v e t o go back t o t h i s a l l e g e d
s o u r c e of Saussurean i n s p i r a t i o n , namely G a b e l e n t z ' s work, Die Sprach-
wissenschaft: Ihre Aufgaben, Methoden und bisherigen Ergebnisse, which
appeared i n L e i p z i g i n 1 8 9 1 . ~ ~It s h o u l d b e p o i n t e d o u t even a t t h i s
s t a g e of our i n q u i r y t h a t , when Gabelentz was engaged i n w r i t i n g h i s
book, t h e most i n f l u e n t i a l w r i t i n g s of t h e 1 9 t h c e n t u r y , f o r i n s t a n c e
t h e books by P a u l , S i e v e r s , S t e i n t h a l , and Whitney, w e r e a v a i l a b l e t o
him. 1891 i s a l s o t h e y e a r when S a u s s u r e assumed h i s p r o f e s s o r s h i p
a t Geneva i n d i c a t i n g even i n h i s f i r s t l e c t u r e s h i s o c c u p a t i o n w i t h
g e n e r a l problems of language s t u d y . l2 Furthermore i t s h o u l d b e added
t h a t i t h a s now b e e n e s t a b l i s h e d ( c f . De Mauro, 1970: xxxv) t h a t S a u s s u r e
owned a copy of G a b e l e n t z ' s Sprachwissenschaft, a f a c t which w i l l e x c l u d e
13
any doubt t h a t S a u s s u r e was a c q u a i n t e d w i t h G a b e l e n t z ' s i d e a s .
15
According t o r e c e n t s t u d i e s p u b l i s h e d by E. z w i r n e r , 1 4 K. H. Rensch,
and E. ~ o s e r i u , ' ~t h e f o l l o w i n g c l a i m s a r e made r e g a r d i n g t h e importance
of Gabelentz on t h e development of Saussurean p r i n c i p l e s : 1) the dis-
t i n c t i o n between Zangue/paroZe a s w e l l a s t h e concept of facult5 du
kngage had b e e n a n t i c i p a t e d by Gabelentz 's d i s t i n c t i o n between "Einzel-
sprache", "Rede", and "Sprachverm6gen1' which t o g e t h e r c o n s t i t u t e t h e
more g e n e r a l concept of "Sprache" . 2) Gabelentz 's d i s t i n c t i o n between
I'
h i s t o r i s c h - g e n e a l o g i s c h e Sprachforschung" and " e i n z e l s p r a c h l i c h e Fors-
chung" seems s t r i k i n g l y s i m i l a r t o t h e Saussurean dichotomy of synchrony
and diachrony, and 3) G a b e l e n t z ' s concept of "System" a l s o a p p e a r s t o
have a n t i c i p a t e d S a u s s u r e ' s a f f i r m a t i o n about t h e s y s t e m a t i c c h a r a c t e r
of language. De Mauro (1968:350) f u r t h e r s u g g e s t s , by means of r e f e r e n c e
t o H j e l m s l e v (1928:112ff .), t h a t G a b e l e n t z ' s d i s t i n c t i o n between "Form"
and " S t o f f " (cf . Gabelentz, 1902: 122-3, 324-60) could b e p a r a l l e l e d w i t h
S a u s s u r e ' s d i s t i n c t i o n between form and s u b s t a n c e ( o r m a t i & e ) , a sug-
g e s t i o n which w i l l n o t b e pursued h e r e b e c a u s e a d i s c u s s i o n of t h i s t o p i c
would go f a r beyond t h e s c o p e of t h e p r e s e n t i n q u i r y . Moreover, we f a i l
t o s e e why Gabelentz s h o u l d b e c o n s i d e r e d t h e s o u r c e of t h i s t r o u b l e -
some dichotomy s i n c e Humboldt had a l r e a d y e n l a r g e d on t h i s t o p i c two
g e n e r a t i o n s e a r l i e r ( c f . Meier, 1961:16) and P a u l and o t h e r s had e x p r e s s e d
t h e i r dismay about t h i s cumbersome d i s t i n c t i o n p r i o r t o t h e a p p e a r a n c e
of Gab e l e n t z ' s S p r a c h w i s s e n s c h a f t .
I n d e a l i n g w i t h t h e t h r e e a s p e c t s mentioned above, we s h a l l d e v o t e
p a r t i c u l a r a t t e n t i o n t o t h e s t u d y by C o s e r i u (1967b) f o r v a r i o u s r e a s o n s :
1 ) Zwirner's a s s e r t i o n s a r e mostly p o o r l y documented, erroneous i n t h e i r
d e t a i l , and b i a s e d on v a r i o u s p o i n t s ; 2) Rensch's p a p e r (which i s t h e
most b a l a n c e d account of t h e r e l a t i o n between S a u s s u r e and Gabelentz
we are aware o f ) does n o t c o n t a i n many of t h e p o s i t i v e c l a i m s which
Coseriu h a s made, and 3) C o s e r i u ' s a r t i c l e i s , t o o u r knowledge, t h e
most r e c e n t p u b l i c a t i o n on t h i s m a t t e r .
The second paragraph of t h e g e n e r a l p a r t of G a b e l e n t z ' s book i s
e n t i t l e d "Begriff d e r menschlichen Sprache" (1901: 2-4), and t h e a u t h o r
g i v e s t h e f o l l o w i n g d e f i n i t i o n of t h e o b j e c t of l i n g u i s t i c s t u d y :
"Mensch Ziche S p r a c h e is t der g e g l i e d e r t e Ausdruck d e s Gedankens durch
Laute. It (p. 3). Gabelentz adds t h a t t h i s d e f i n i t i o n comprises v a r i o u s
a s p e c t s d i s t i n g u i s h i n g between ( a ) "Sprache a l s Erscheinung, a l s j e w e i l i g e s
Ausdrucksmit t e l f i;r den j e w e i l i g e n Gedanken, d. h . als Redel'; (b) language
as " e i n e e i n h e i t l i c h e Gesamrntheit s o l c h e r A u s d r u c k s m i t t e l f i i r j eden be-
l i e b i g e n Gedanken" adding t h a t t h i s i s t h e s e n s e we a t t r i b u t e t o t h e
language of a p e o p l e , a s o c i a l c l a s s , e t c . , l8 and ( c ) language a s a
II
Gemeingut d e r ~ e n s c h e n " e x p a t i a t i n g t h i s i d e a i n t h e subsequent s t a t e -
ment: "Gemeint i s t damit d a s Sprachvermiigen, d.h. d i e a l l e n Vijlkern
innewohnende Gabe des Gedankenausdruckes durch Sprache. " (1901: 3) .
It s h o u l d b e p o i n t e d o u t t h a t Gabelentz does n o t g i v e h i s d e f i n i t i o n s
a t t h e b e g i n n i n g of h i s book and t h e n c a r r y on w i t h o t h e r m a t t e r s , b u t
r e i t e r a t e s them on v a r i o u s o c c a s i o n s and l i n k s them t o t h e d i s t i n c t i o n
<
between h i s t o r i c a l and d e s c r i p t i v e l i n g u i s t i c s a s w e l l a s t o t h e n o t i o n
of system i n language, a s w i l l b e shown below.
Godel h a s d i s c u s s e d t h e Saussurean d i s t i n c t i o n between Zangue and
parole a t l e n g t h i n h i s monograph (1957:142-59) and concludes t h a t i t
11
a p p o r t e moins d e l u m i s r e que d e t r o u b l e " ( p . 1 5 9 ) . To b e s u r e S a u s s u r e
i n t r o d u c e d t h i s dichotomy r a t h e r l a t e i n h i s c a r e e r ( i n c o n t r a s t t o h i s
much e a r l i e r d i s t i n c t i o n between d e s c r i p t i v e and h i s t o r i c a l l i n g u i s t i c s ,
f o r example) w i t h t h e r e s u l t t h a t Godel a s k s c a u t i o u s l y whether t h i s
d i s t i n c t i o n h a s n o t simply b e e n a b s e n t from S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r i z i n g p r i o r
t o h i s c o u r s e s on g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s (SM, 1 4 3 ) . The documentation
provided by Godel on t h i s p o i n t from s t u d e n t s ' n o t e s r e v e a l s t h a t i n
h i s f i r s t c o u r s e of 1907 S a u s s u r e c h a r a c t e r i z e d parole and langue i n
q u i t e a d i f f e r e n t manner from t h e one h e i n t r o d u c e d i n t h e s u b s e q u e n t
two c o u r s e s ( c f . SM, 1 4 5 ) ; t h e r e S a u s s u r e d i s t i n g u i s h e d ( w i t h a r e f e r e n c e
t o Whitney [ c f . CLG(E), 331) between langue and facult; du Zangage,
Zangue a s t h e s o c i a l e n t i t y w i t h t h e h e l p of which man communicates,
and Zangage a s t h e i n d i v i d u a l ' s a b i l i t y t o s p e a k ( c f . SM, 1 4 7 ) . Godel
(SM, 148) p o i n t s o u t t h a t t h i s d i s t i n c t i o n had been made by S a u s s u r e
much e a r l i e r ( b e f o r e 1894?) though i n somewhat d i f f e r e n t terms, b u t
t h e r e i s no i n d i c a t i o n t h a t S a u s s u r e i n t r o d u c e d i t i n t h e manner found
i n t h e Cours p r i o r t o 1894 when h e w r o t e h i s a p p r e c i a t i o n of Whitney
( w i t h which we have d e a l t a t some l e n g t h i n a p r e v i o u s c h a p t e r , c f . 1 . 3 . 1 ) .
The f a c t t h a t t h e i n f l u e n t i a l d i s t i n c t i o n between langue and parole
was n o t made p r i o r t o t h e f i r s t c o u r s e i n 1907 a l l o w s u s t o q u o t e t h o s e
f o r m u l a t i o n s of t h e second e d i t i o n of G a b e l e n t z ' s Sprachwissenschaft
of 1901 which were added by t h e e d i t o r who d e c i d e d , a c c o r d i n g t o h i s own
words, t o emend c e r t a i n p a s s a g e s "where p r o g r e s s of s c i e n c e u r g e n t l y
required i t ... .'I (1901:vii). Here, t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between t h e
f i r s t two a s p e c t s of language i s c h a r a c t e r i z e d i n t h e f o l l o w i n g manner:

* Die Rede i s t e i n e Xusserung d e s e i n z e l n e n Menschen, d i e s i e

erzeugende K r a f t gehijrt a l s o zunzchst dem Einzelnen a n . Aber
d i e Rede w i l l v e r s t a n d e n s e i n , und s i e kann n u r v e r s t a n d e n
werden, wenn d i e K r a f t , d e r s i e e n t s t r E m t , auch i n dem HGrer
w i r k t . D i e s e K r a f t , - e i n Apparat von S t o f f e n und Formen, -
i s t eben d i e E i n z e l s p r a c h e . (1901:59).
 Rede p e r t a i n s t o t h e i n d i v i d u a l and i s an a c t i v i t y which r e l i e s
on t h e code, t h e EinxeZsprache which p e r m i t s mutual u n d e r s t a n d i n g ( s .
a l s o 1901: 8, 12) . Together w i t h t h e SprachvermGgen (cf . 1901: 303-17)
t h e y form t h e t h r e e a s p e c t s of Sprache. C o s e r i u ' s (l967b: 78) diagram
which d e m o n s t r a t e s t h e f o l l o w i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p seems t h e r e f o r e q u i t e
correct:

i
Rede
Sprache Einze Zsprache
Sprachvemijgen
The p a r a l l e l i s m of G a b e l e n t z ' s t r i p a r t i t i o n and t h a t of S a u s s u r e
i s s t r i k i n g and one does n o t need e x t e n s i v e c i t a t i o n from t h e Corns t o
support t h i s impression. For S a u s s u r e (though n o t on a l l o c c a s i o n s )
parole was a c t u a l i z a t i o n ("ex6cut ion") of Zangage through t h e language
code, i . e . langue ( c f . CLG, 30f.; LTS, 3 8 ) . The f a c u l t y of language,
t h e " f a c u l t 6 d ' a s s o c i a t i o n e t d e c o o r d i n a t i o n " (CLG, 2 9 ) , however, does
n o t seem t o have been used f r e q u e n t l y i n S a u s s u r e ' s l e c t u r e s ( c f . CLG(E),
39) and was of m a r g i n a l i n t e r e s t f o r S a u s s u r e , probably b e c a u s e t h e a b i l i t y
t o s p e a k i s n o t an o b j e c t of t h e l i n g u i s t ' s s t u d y . S a u s s u r e ' s terms may
n e v e r t h e l e s s b e a r r a n g e d i n t h e same manner a s t h o s e d e f i n e d by Gabelentz:
paro Ze
Zangage
C Zangue
facuZt6 du Zangage
When d e f i n i n g Zangue S a u s s u r e emphasized t h a t i t should n o t b e
confused w i t h Zangage, and t h a t l a n g u e i s "2 l a f o i s un p r o d u i t s o c i a l
de l a f a c u l t & du l a n g a g e e t un ensemble d e conventions n g c e s s a i r e s ,
a d o p t & e s p a r l e c o r p s s o c i a l pour p e r m e t t r e l ' e x e r c i c e d e c e t t e f a c u l t ;
chez l e s i n d i v i d u s . " (CLG, 25; c f . CLG(E) , 31-2) .I9 T h i s l a s t q u o t a t i o n ,
however, c o n t a i n s a n a s p e c t which h a s no p a r a l l e l i n G a b e l e n t z ' s t h e o r y
b u t which p l a y s a n i m p o r t a n t r c l e i n S a u s s u r e ' s argument; i . e . the dis-
t i n c t i o n between s o c i a l and i n d i v i d u a l u n d e r l y i n g and s u p p o r t i n g t h e
d e f i n i t i o n s of langue and parole. T h i s does n o t mean t h a t Gabelentz
i g n o r e d t h e s o c i a l a s p e c t of language i n g e n e r a l f o r Gabelentz observed
t h a t language i s a p r o d u c t of t h e community ("Erzeugnis d e r G e s e l l s c h a f t "
[ l g O l : 31) and t h e p r o p e r t y ("Gemeingut") of a s m a l l e r o r l a r g e r group
 180

of p e o p l e (p. 8) .20 But n e i t h e r t h e s o c i a l a s p e c t of language nor t h e

i n d i v i d u a l a s p e c t of speech h a v e been i n c o r p o r a t e d i n t o G a b e l e n t z ' s
d e f i n i t i o n of t h e s e terms. T h i s o b s e r v a t i o n does n o t , of c o u r s e , e x c l u d e
t h e p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t S a u s s u r e might have been i n f l u e n c e d by G a b e l e n t z ' s
t r i p a r t i t i o n ; t h e o p p o s i t i o n s o c i a l : i n d i v i d u a l i s , we b e l i e v e , of
secondary importance i n S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r y and w i t h o u t r i g o r o u s conse-
quences on h i s d e f i n i t i o n s of e i t h e r langue o r parole i n a c t u a l l i n g u i s t i c
terms. Most probably t h i s d i s t i n c t i o n d e r i v e s , as w e h a v e demonstrated
e a r l i e r ( c f . 1 . 3 . 1 and 1 . 3 . 2 . 2 ) , from o t h e r s o u r c e s , f o r i n s t a n c e t h e
works of Whitney and P a u l .
On t h e o t h e r hand, t h e l i n g u i s t i c a l l y p e r t i n e n t d e f i n i t i o n of Zangue
i n S a u s s u r e ' s Cows views language a s a system, a system of ( a r b i t r a r y )
s i g n s ( c f . CLG, 32, 33, 106, 107, 182) o r a "syst$me d e p u r e s v a l e u r s "
(CLG, l l 6 ) , f o r example. I n t h i s r e s p e c t Gabelentz a p p e a r s a t f i r s t
s i g h t t o b e c l o s e t o S a u s s u r e ' s n o t i o n , a s a comparison between Gabe-
l e n t z ' s a f f i r m a t i o n s c o n c e r n i n g t h e s y s t e m a t i c n a t u r e of language and
S a u s s u r e ' s d e f i n i t i o n s would s u g g e s t :

R e j e c t i n g t h e i d e a t h a t langu- S a u s s u r e ' s d e f i n i t i o n s of language

a g e and a l i v i n g organism a r e (langue) a r e a s f o l l o w s :
merely i n v e n t o r i e s of u n r e l a t e d
u n i t s Gabelentz a f f i r m s : 11
... l a l a n g u e e s t un s y s tsme
q u i n e conna?t que s o n o r d r e
"Beide s i n d i n j e d e r Phase i h r e s propre." (CLG, 43; c f . CLG(E),
Leb ens ( r e l a t i v ) vollkommene 64).
Sys teme, nur von s i c h s e l b s t
abhsngig; ... " (1901:g).
O r , one may compare t h e f o l l o w i n g two s t a t e m e n t s i n G a b e l e n t z ' s Sprach-
wissenschaft, and S a u s s u r e ' s Corns:
* "Jede Sprache i s t e i n System, La l a n g u e e s t un s y s t s m e dont
11

d e s s e n s&mntliche T h e i l e organ- t o u t e s l e s p a r t i e s peuvent e t

i s c h zusammenh2ngen und zusammen-
wirken. Man a h n t , k e i n e r d i e s e r
T h e i l e d i i r f t e f e h l e n oder a n d e r s
s e i n , ohne d a s s d a s Ganze verzn-
d e r t wiirde." (1901:481).
d o i v e n t z t r e c o n s i d 6 r 6 e s dans
l e u r s o l i d a r i t g synchronique."
(CLG, 124; c f . CLG(E), 1 9 2 ) .

The r e a d e r should b e warned however a g a i n s t concluding from t h e s e i n s t a n c e s

of a n undeniably s t r i k i n g p a r a l l e l i s m between t h e views put forward by
Gabelentz and S a u s s u r e t h a t t h e r e must h a v e been a dependence by t h e
l a t t e r on t h e former. There a r e i n f a c t v e r y few more i n s t a n c e s ( e . g .
1901:63, 76) i n which Gabelentz fnakes comparable u s e of t h e term 'system'
21
t o t h a t found i n t h e Cours i n which t h i s term p l a y s a predominant r s l e .
A s f o r t h e u s e of t h e term organism which o c c u r s w i t h some frequency i n
G a b e l e n t z ' s work, S a u s s u r e l s l e c t u r e s r e v e a l t h a t h e t o o employed t h i s
e x p r e s s i o n on s e v e r a l o c c a s i o n s and, i n f a c t , a s homonymous w i t h 'system'
22
( c f . CLG(E), 59).
I n a d d i t i o n , c o n t r a r y t o what C o s e r i u (1967b:88) wants t h e r e a d e r
t o b e l i e v e , Gabelentz does n o t embed h i s a f f i r m a t i o n s c o n c e r n i n g t h e
s y s t e m a t i c n a t u r e of language i n h i s d e f i n i t i o n s of EinzeZsprache ( i . e .
langue i n t h e Saus s u r e a n s e n s e ) b u t s p e a k s r a t h e r g e n e r a l l y of Sprache .
The two p a s s a g e s quoted above t a k e n o u t of t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e c o n t e x t s
s u g g e s t a s i m i l a r i t y of views which t h e book a s a whole does n o t m a i n t a i n .
Nowhere does Gabelentz s p e a k of language a s a system of signs o r a s a
s y s t e m of p u r e v a l u e s a s i s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of S a u s s u r e ' s a f f i r m a t i o n s
n o r i s t h e r e any i n d i c a t i o n i n G a b e l e n t z ' s work t h a t h e was aware ( a s
w a s H . P a u l , f o r example) of t h e f a c t t h a t t h e system a s such i n language
r e v e a l s i t s e l f i n a s y n c h r o n i c manner a s a language s t a t e . To c o n c l u d e
w e may s t a t e t h a t w h i l e t h e r e seems t o b e an a s t o n i s h i n g p a r a l l e l i s m
between them t o b e found i n t h e d i s t i n c t i o n of langue, parole, and Zangage
and t h e u s e of t h e term facult$ du Zangage ("Sprechfghigkeit"), Gabelentz
23
does n o t however p r o v i d e any a x i o m a t i c system i n which t h e s e terms o p e r a t e .
S a u s s u r e was c e r t a i n l y f a m i l i a r w i t h G a b e l e n t z ' s book b u t must s u r e l y have
b e e n d i s a p p o i n t e d w i t h what h e a c t u a l l y found t h e r e . It i s t h e r e f o r e s u r -
p r i s i n g t o r e a d i n C o s e r i u ' s paper t h a t i n Gabelentz t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p s
between langue and parole (we r e t a i n C o s e r i u ' s s u g g e s t i v e u s e of t h e s e
S a u s s u r e a n terms f o r Gabelentz 's d i s t i n c t i o n between ~ i n z e l s p r a c h eand
Rede) "sont beaucoup p l u s c l a i r s , p l u s coh'erents e t mieux fond& ... ,
pr6cis6ment p a r c e q u ' i l [ i . e . G a b e l e n t z ] j u s t i f i e s a d i s t i n c t i o n unique-
ment p a r lloppositionr~a~isation-syst~me'l
(1967b:92) s i n c e , C o s e r i u adds,
G a b e l e n t z d i d n o t f a v o u r t h e c o n t r a s t s o c i a l v s . i n d i v i d u a l , which,
i t i s t r u e , t e n d s t o r e n d e r S a u s s u r e ' s d i s t i n c t i o n somewhat o b s c u r e and
contradictory (cf. 2.2ii). It i s t y p i c a l of C o s e r i u ' s approach, n o t
o n l y t h a t h e makes u s e of Saussurean terms t o i n t e r p r e t ~ a b e l e n t z ' s
n o t i o n s , a procedure which c a u s e s a s u b t l e s h i f t i n g of meaning, b u t
t h a t h e assumes c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and s t a t e m e n t s about t h e n a t u r e of language
and t h e manner of t r e a t i n g i t s v a r i o u s a s p e c t s which a r e n o t t o b e found
i n G a b e l e n t z ' s Sprachwissenschaft. A procedure of t h i s kind h a s t o b e
c r i t i c i z e d on t h e grounds t h a t i t i s based on t h e e r r o n e o u s assumption
t h a t G a b e l e n t z ' s e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l paradigm of 1890 i s s u b s t a n t i a l l y iden-
t i c a l w i t h t h a t p r e v a i l i n g a t t h e b e g i n n i n g of t h i s c e n t u r y when S a u s s u r e
t a u g h t h i s c o u r s e s on g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s ( f o r a n i l l u s t r a t i o n t o t h i s
e f f e c t s e e Arens, 1969: 403-4) . The s u b s t i t u t i o n " r g a l i s a t i o n - s y s t s m e "
f o r G a b e l e n t z ' s d i s t i n c t i o n between Rede and Einzelsprache i s a t b e s t
a n o v e r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of what G a b e l e n t z a c t u a l l y s a i d ( c f . 1901:3-4,
and e l s e w h e r e ) ; i n f a c t , as we have a l r e a d y p o i n t e d o u t e a r l i e r i n t h i s
c h a p t e r , t h e r e i s no such d e f i n i t i o n of Einzelsprache i n G a b e l e n t z which
i n c l u d e s t h e n o t i o n of system a s i t s c r u c i a l a s p e c t , c o n t r a r y t o what
can b e r e p e a t e d l y found i n S a u s s u r e ' s work.
C o s e r i u adds t o t h e d i s t o r t i o n of t h e p i c t u r e when h e a f f i r m s :

Aussi, Gabelentz p e r ~ o i t - i l m i e u x que S a u s s u r e que, d a n s un

c e r t a i n s e n s , l a l i n g u i s t i q u e d e s c r i p t i v e a pour o b j e t l a
p a r o l e - c'est-;-dire, l e fonctionnement d e l a langue , -
que l a l a n g u e s e d g d u i t d e l a p a r o l e e t que, 2 proprement
p a r l e r , il n ' y a pas c o n f l i t e n t r e l a l i n g u i s t i q u e d e s c r i p -
t i v e e t l a l i n g u i s t i q u e h i s t o r i q u e , puisque c e t t e d e r n i s r e
s e propose d ' e x p l i q u e r l a langue, non pas l a p a r o l e . (1967b:
92).

It cannot b e s u f f i c i e n t l y s t r e s s e d t h a t t h e s e i d e a s a r e n e i t h e r t h o s e
of Gabelentz n o r S a u s s u r e b u t C o s e r i u ' s own c o n c e p t i o n s . Saussure d i d
n o t t h i n k t h a t parole i s t h e p r o p e r o b j e c t of s y n c h r o n i c s t u d y of l a n g u a g e -
h i s u s e of 'mechanism' ( c f . CLG, 107) p e r t a i n s t o langue and n o t t o parole
and i s synonymous w i t h fonetion ( c f . LTS, 34) -, n o r d i d h e ever argue
t h a t langue c o u l d b e deduced from t h e speech a c t . Gabelentz, on t h e
o t h e r hand, never r e f e r r e d t o a n o t i o n which c o u l d b e r e n d e r e d by "fonc-
tionnement d e l a langue", and i f h e a c t u a l l y made t h e o b s e r v a t i o n s con-
c e r n i n g t h e r e l a t i o n between d e s c r i p t i v e and h i s t o r i c a l l i n g u i s t i c s i n
t h e manner expounded by C o s e r i u , t h e h y p o t h e s i s which C o s e r i u tries t o
prove, namely t h a t Gabelentz had a profound i n f l u e n c e on S a u s s u r e , can
b e i n v a l i d a t e d i n many r e s p e c t s . D i s c u s s i o n of t h i s p o i n t , i . e . t h e second
main c o n t e n t i o n t h a t Gabelentz a n t i c i p a t e d S a u s s u r e ' s d i s t i n c t i o n between
synchrony and diachrony ( c f . C o s e r i u , i n ZFSL 77:30 [1967], Zwirner,
1969: 32, and elsewhere, and, more c a u t i o u s l y , Rensch, 1966: 36-9), will
t a k e p l a c e l a t e r a t some l e n g t h .
According t o h i s t r i p a r t i t i o n of Rede, Einzelsprache and Sprach-
vermSgen Gabelentz d i s t i n g u i s h e s between t h r e e o b j e c t s of l i n g u i s t i c
i n v e s t i g a t i o n t o which one p a r t of t h e volume i s devoted: 1 ) Die einzel-
sprachliche Forschung (1901:54-135); 2) Die genealogisch-historisehe
Sprachforschung (136-301, and 3) Die allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft
(302-484).
I n 1891 Gabelentz d i s t i n g u i s h e d t h e h i s t o r i c a l - g e n e a l o g i c a l t r e a t -
ment from t h e i n v e s t i g a t i o n of t h e Einzelsprache by c h a r a c t e r i z i n g t h e
l a t t e r as " e i n VermGgen, d a s a u s s e i n e n i u s s e r u n g e n b e g r i f f e n , i n d i e s e n
nachgewiesen werden w i l l . " (1901: 139) . To r e c o g n i z e , d e s c r i b e and
a n a l y z e t h i s c a p a c i t y and deduce from i t t h e m a n i f e s t a t i o n s of t h e Einzel-
sprache s h o u l d b e t h e g o a l of t h e i n v e s t i g a t o r . These somewhat vague
i d e a s h a v e been made more e x p l i c i t i n t h e second e d i t i o n of G a b e l e n t z ' s
Sprachwissenschaft i n which i t i s s a i d t h a t i t i s n e i t h e r t h e t o o l s n o r
t h e o b j e c t of i n v e s t i g a t i o n which d i f f e r b u t t h e g o a l s t h a t t h e i n v e s -
t i g a t o r h a s i n mind. I n t h i s l a t t e r r e s p e c t Gabelentz ( r e a d : ~ c h u i e n b u r ~ )
s t a t e s w i t h r e g a r d t o t h e r e l a t i o n between t h e d e s c r i p t i v e and t h e h i s -
t o r i c a l approach: *I1Beide Forschungszweige v e r h a l t e n s i c h zu e i n a n d e r
g e g e n s g t z l i c h und s i c h erggnzendM a d d i n g t h a t one method of r e s e a r c h
may j u s t a t t a i n what t h e o t h e r could n o t (1901:140). The o b j e c t of t h e
d e s c r i p t i v e approach i s d e f i n e d i n t h e f o l l o w i n g manner:

* D i e e i n z e l s p r a c h l i c h e Forschung e r k l i r t d i e ~ ~ r a c h i u s s e r -
ungen a u s dem j e w e i l i g e n ~ p r a c h v e r m 6 g e nund t h u t s i c h genug,
wenn s i e d i e s e s Vermzgen, w i e e s d e r z e i t i h d e r S e e l e d e s
Volkes i s t oder war, i n seinem i n n e r e n Zusarnmenhange s y s t e m -
tisch begreift. (1901: 1 4 0 ) .

C o s e r i u (1967b:80) i s i n e r r o r when h e concludes from t h e f o l l o w i n g

s t a t e m e n t i n Gabelentz t h a t t h e einzelsprachliche Forschung deduces
language from a c t u a l speech u t t e r a n c e s and e x p l a i n s speech w i t h t h e h e l p
of language: *"Wir l e r n e n und l e h r e n d i e Rede [ s i c ! ] aufbauen a u s i h r e n
S t o f f e n und nach i h r e n Gesetzen, nachdem w i r d i e s e S t o f f e und G e s e t z e
i n d u c t i v , aus d e r Rede, e r m i t t e l t haben." (1901:59). I n f a c t t h e reader
of today might expect t h a t Gabelentz had meant t h a t d e s c r i p t i v e l i n -
g u i s t i c s a t t e m p t s t o deduce language from t h e o b s e r v a t i o n of a l a r g e
q u a n t i t y of speech u t t e r a n c e s ; however, a s t h i s q u o t a t i o n r e v e a l s , Gabe-
l e n t z ' s s t a t e m e n t does n o t make e x p l i c i t what C o s e r i u i s anxious t o s e e ,
and an e a r l i c r q u o t a t i o n h a s t o b e r e f e r r e d t o i n o r d e r t o j u s t i f y C o s e r i u ' s
i n t e r p r e t a t i o n (cf . p. 13) . It a p p e a r s r a t h e r t h a t einzelsprachliche
Forschung i s concerned w i t h speech and t h e h i s t o r i c a l - g e n e a l o g i c a l l i n g u i s -
t i c s w i t h language when i t i s maintained:

* Die e i n z e l s p r a c h l i c h e Forschung e r k l s r t d i e Rede a u s dem

Wesen d e r Einzelsprache. D i e g e n e a l o g i s c h - h i s t o r i s c h e er-
k G r t d i e Einzelsprache, w i e s i e s i c h nach Raum und Z e i t
g e s p a l t e n und gewandelt h a t . (1901: 12)

On t h e o t h e r hand i t cannot b e h e l d t h a t Rede i s i n f a c t t h e o b j e c t of

t h e e i n z e Zsprachliche Forschung when t h e "Sprachgef iihl" a t a g i v e n t i m e
a p p e a r s t o b e t h e p r o p e r g o a l of r e s e a r c h a s seems c l e a r from a n o t h e r
s t a t e m e n t p e r t a i n i n g t o t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between t h e " b e s c h r e i b e n d e
Wissenschaft" (1901: 59) and h i s t o r i c a l l i n g u i s t i c s :

* Wie und warum j e n e s VermEgen und d i e s e s Gefiihl s o geworden,

b e g r e i f t s i e 1 i . e . t h e d e s c r i p t i v e l i n g u i s t i c s ] n i c h t . Dagegen
w i l l d i e S p r a c h g e s c h i c h t e a l s solche eben w e i t e r n i c h t s a l s
d i e s e s e r k l i r e n . Das h e i s s t : d i e ~ e b e n s g u s s e r u n g e nd e r Sprache,
d i e Rede, b e g r e i f t s i e [ i . e . t h e h i s t o r i c a l l i n g u i s t i c s ] g a r
n i c h t . W i l l s i e s i e b e g r e i f e n , s o muss s i e eben a u f den e i n z e l -
s p r a c h l i c h e n Standpunkt G b e r t r e t e n . (1901: 140) .
A t l e a s t i t can b e observed t h a t Gabelentz was aware t h a t d e s c r i p t i v e
l i n g u i s t i c s i s concerned w i t h a g i v e n language s t a t e , ("Zustand") when
h e a t t e m p t e d t o d e f i n e t h e o b j e c t of a ' s y n c h r o n i c ' approach, a l t h o u g h
h e n o t e s a t t h e same time t h e dynamic c h a r a c t e r of language i n t h e p o s t -
Humboldtian f a s h i o n :

Thatsiichlich i s t nun a b e r j e n e s VermGgen e i n gewordenes und

i m e r w e i t e r werdendes, s i c h vergnderndes und v e r s c h i e b e n d e s ,
und auch d a s w i l l e r k l i i r t werden ...
(1901:139). To e x p l a i n
t h i s change i s , h e adds, t h e o b j e c t of t h e " ~ ~ r a c h g e s c h i c h t e " .

Gabelentz adds a t h i r d l i n g u i s t i c s t o t h e o t h e r two whose o b j e c t

/

i s , a c c o r d i n g t o h i s t r i p a r t i t i o n of Rede-Einzelsprache-SprachvemZgen,
t h e f a c u l t y of speech:

D i e s e Wissenschaft h a t d a s k e n s c h l i c h e ~prachvermEgens e l b s t
zum Gegenstande. S i e w i l l d i e s ~ e r m i j g e nb e g r e i f e n , n i c h t
n u r i n R&Acsicht auf d i e g e i s t l e i b l i c h e n K r s f t e und Anlagen,
a u s denen e s s i c h zusammensetzt, sondern auch, s o w e i t d i e s
e r r e i c h b a r i s t , dem ganzen Umfange s e i n e r E n t f a l t u n g e n .
(1901: 302).

However, t h i s branch of l i n g u i s t i c s which Gabelentz c a l l s "allgemeine

S p r a c h w i s s e n s c h a f t " i s n o t o n l y concerned w i t h a n a l y z i n g t h e u n d e r l y i n g
mechanism of human speech, s o t o speak, b u t embraces a t t h e same t i m e
a l l s t a t e m e n t s which h a v e been made concerning t h e o b j e c t and t h e f i n d i n g s
of d e s c r i p t i v e a s w e l l a s h i s t o r i c a l l i n g u i s t i c s ( c f . Zoc. c i t . and p.
479). I n t h e second e d i t i o n t h e o b j e c t of each i n d i v i d u a l a s p e c t of t h e
b r a n c h e s of l i n g u i s t i c s h a s b e e n d e f i n e d t o g e t h e r i n t h e f o l l o w i n g manner:

* D e r Gegenstand d e r e i n z e l s p r a c h l i c h e n Forschung i s t d i e
Sprache a l s Rede: d i e s o l l aus dem n a t i o n a l e n SprachvermGgen
e r k l g r t werden, nachdem d i e s e s , i n d u c t i v , a u s i h r [ i . e . t h e
Rede] e r m i t t e l t worden i s t . S i e h a t n i c h t den Ursprung d i e s e s
Vermagens zu e r k l z r e n , - d a s i s t Sache d e r a l l g e m e i n e n Sprach-
w i s s e n s c h a f t - auch n i c h t d e s s e n z e i t l i c h e Wandelungen zu v e r -
folgen, - d a s g e h z r t d e r S p r a c h g e s c h i c h t e an, - sondern s i e s o l l
d i e s VermGgen, w i e e s j e w e i l i g i s t , entdecken, b e s c h r e i b e n und
b i s i n d i e l e t z t e n s e i n e r Windungen h i n e i n v e r f o l g e n . (1901:76).

C o s e r i u (1967b:81ff.) q u o t e s a number of p a s s a g e s from G a b e l e n t z ' s

book which a t t e m p t t o show t h a t i t s a u t h o r h a s developed a n o t i o n s t r i -
k i n g l y s i m i l a r t o S a u s s u r e ' s concept of synchrony: t h e einzeZsprach-
Ziche Forschung i s concerned w i t h a l a n g u a g e s t a t e (l9Ol:6O), t h e func-
t i o n i n g of language a t a g i v e n moment (p. 8 ) ; t h e d e s c r i p t i v e l i n g u i s t ' s
t a s k i s t o d e s c r i b e o n l y "was i m sprachgef;;hle d e s Volkes vorhanden i s t . "
(p. 124; c f . a l s o pp. 25, 28); t h e " e i n z e l s p r a c h l i c h e F o r s c h e r " assumes
t h e s t a n d p o i n t of t h e n a t i v e s p e a k e r : " . . . was diesem i n seinem
Sprachbewusstsein gegeben i s t , d a s d a r f e r [ i . e . t h e d e s c r i p t i v e l i n -
g u i s t ] a l s gegeben b e t r a c h t e n . I' (lgOl:92) . I n f a c t it can b e shown
t h a t Gabelentz c l e a r l y d i s t i n g u i s h e d between t h e d e s c r i p t i v e approach
t o l i n g u i s t i c a n a l y s i s and t h e h i s t o r i c a l - e t y m o l o g i c a l one; further-
more, C o s e r i u (1967b:85-6) compares a number of q u o t a t i o n s from b o t h
t h e Cours and Gabelentz 's Sprachwissenschaft t o s u g g e s t t h a t S a u s s u r e
must have d e r i v e d h i s i n s i g h t s from Gabelentz. C o s e r i u a v e r s t h a t Saus-
s u r e ' s term ' s y n c h r o n i c ' n o t o n l y c o r r e s p o n d s t o G a b e l e n t z ' s e x p r e s s i o n
It
g l e i c h z e i t i g " b u t a l s o t h a t t h e l a t t e r h a s siinply been t r a n s l a t e d by
S a u s s u r e i n t o 'termes s u c c e s s i f s ' . By t h e same token S a u s s u r e ' s term
'idiosynchronique' i s s a i d t o correspond t o G a b e l e n t z ' s u s e of t h e ex-
p r e s s i o n of ' g l e i c h z e i t i g und g l e i c h s p r a c h l i c h ' . However, a l t h o u g h t h e
s i m i l a r i t y between t h e s e terms cannot b e denied, C o s e r i u ' s c l a i m h a s
t o b e r e j e c t e d on t h e f o l l o w i n g grounds: 1 ) Gabelentz d i d n o t employ
11
g l e i c h z e i t i g " a s a t e c h n i c a l term i n a manner s i m i l a r t o S a u s s u r e ' s
u s e of "synchronique" throughout t h e Cowls;24 2) t h e o n l y i n s t a n c e which
C o s e r i u c i t e s i n which G a b e l e n t z 's book n o t e s t h e e x p r e s s i o n " g l e i c h -
z e i t i g und g l e i c h s p r a c h l i c h " i s c o n t a i n e d i n t h e second e d i t i o n of t h e ,

Sprachwissenschaft ( p . 61) b u t n o t i n t h e f i r s t of 1891; 3) S a u s s u r e ,

b e s i d e s n o t i n g i n 1894 t h a t h e had conceived of l i n g u i s t i c s as a d o u b l e
s c i e n c e "depuis b i e n d e s ann6es1' ( c f . SM, 45), n o t o n l y d e f i n e d t h e s e
two a s p e c t s d i a c h r o n i c and s y n c h r o n i c probably a s e a r l y a s i n t h e same
y e a r b u t a l s o used t h e term "idiosynchronique" ( c f . SM, 4 9 ) . In addition
C o s e r i u does n o t seem aware of t h e f a c t t h a t "terme" i n S a u s s u r e ' s u s e
of t h e word does n o t simply mean term i n a g e n e r a l and u n s p e c i f i e d s e n s e
b u t s i g n i f i e s a t e c h n i c a l term i n S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r y , a f a c t which escaped
t h e n o t i c e of t h e e d i t o r s of t h e Cowls ( c f . SM, 279).
A l l t h i s does n o t imply t h a t S a u s s u r e could n o t w e l l h a v e been i n -
f l u e n c e d by G a b e l e n t z ' s work b u t i t s h o u l d b e s t r e s s e d t h a t S a u s s u r e
d i d n o t simply adopt c e r t a i n n o t i o n s h e found i n t h e w r i t i n g s of o t h e r s
a s C o s e r i u ' s f i n d i n g s tend t o s u g g e s t ; S a u s s u r e ' s g r e a t n e s s , i t cannot
b e s u f f i c i e n t l y s t r e s s e d , l i e s i n t h e f a c t t h a t h e worked i d e a s which
were e x p r e s s e d d u r i n g h i s l i f e - t i m e i n t o one whole. Similarly, Saussure
might w e l l have found i n G a b e l e n t z ' s book a model f o r h i s d i s t i n c t i o n
between t h e i n t e r n a l and e x t e r n a l elements of language (CLG, 40-3);
t h e r e Gabelentz p o i n t e d o u t , i n o r d e r t o avoid m i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g s , t h a t
i t i s d e s i r a b l e t o d i s t i n g u i s h between a n e x t e r n a l and a n i n t e r n a l l a n -
guage h i s t o r y by d e f i n i n g t h e terms a s f o l l o w s :

Die Bussere Geschichte e i n e r Sprache i s t d i e G e s c h i c h t e

i h r e r rzumlichen und z e i t l i c h e n V e r b r e i t u n g und etwaigen
 Mischungen IGeneaZogie). Die innere Sprachgeschichte
e r z s h l t und s u c h t zu e r k l z ? e n , w i e s i c h d i e Sprache i n
Riicksicht auf S t o f f und Form a l l m a h l i c h v e r h d e r t h a t .
(1901: 141-2) .
A comparison w i t h S a u s s u r e ' s d e f i n i t i o n s of a Zinguistique interne a s
opposed t o a Zinguistique externe, however, does n o t prove t h a t S a u s s u r e ' s
d i s t i n c t i o n i s connected w i t h language h i s t o r y i n a way s i m i l a r t o Gabe-
l e n t z ' s a f f i r m a t i o n , a s C o s e r i u (1967b:87) m a i n t a i n s , b u t S a u s s u r e h a s
something e n t i r e l y d i f f e r e n t i n mind by emphasizing t h a t language i s a
system of m u t u a l l y r e l a t e d s i g n s which h e e x e m p l i f i e s by i n t r o d u c i n g t h e
analogy between language and a game of c h e s s ( c f . CLG, 4 3 ) . Here, a s on
many o t h e r o c c a s i o n s , Gabelentz does n o t make u s e of t h e n o t i o n of system
i n language a n a s p e c t which, a s we have p o i n t e d o u t above, c o n s t i t u t e s
one of t h e most c r u c i a l elements of S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r y .
Too e a s i l y , i t seems, C o s e r i u h a s succumbed t o t h e t e m p t a t i o n t o
assume from t e r m i n o l o g i c a l s i m i l a r i t i e s and p a r a l l e l s i n c o n c e p t s t h a t
t h e r e was some d i r e c t i n f l u e n c e from Gabelentz on S a u s s u r e , a n assumption
which C o s e r i u (1967b:97) wants t o u n d e r s c o r e by s e t t i n g up a l i s t of terms
from Gabelentz which a r e p a r a l l e l e d by e x p r e s s i o n s i n t h e Cowls. I n doing
s o Coseriu t a k e s t h e s u r f a c e standpoint without i n v e s t i g a t i n g t h e epi-
s t e m o l o g i c a l b a s i s of ~ a b e l e n t z ' sa s opposed t o S a u s s u r e ' s much advanced
l i n g u i s t i c thought. I n a number of i n s t a n c e s a c l o s e examination r e v e a l s
t h a t some e x p r e s s i o n s found i n Gabelentz ( e . g . "Wechselwirkung" o r
I'
Spielraum") a r e n o t employed a s t e c h n i c a l terms a s a r e t h e a l l e g e d
Saussurean c o u n t e r p a r t s ( e . g . " s o l i d a r i t ' 6 " and " l a t i t u d e " ; c f . LTS, 32
and 47 r e s p e c t i v e l y ) . It a l s o a p p e a r s h i g h l y q u e s t i o n a b l e t o view Gabe-
l e n t z ' s f r e q u e n t u s e of t h e post-Humboldtian n o t i o n of "Volksgeist" o r
It
Bewusstsein d e s Volkes" ( c f . 1901: 387) a s a n e q u i v a l e n t t o S a u s s u r e ' s
term of "conscience c o l l e c t i v e " ( c f . CLG(E), 227); t h i s l a t t e r n o t i o n
i n f a c t p l a y s no i m p o r t a n t r c l e i n S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r i z i n g and i s r a r e l y
used i n h i s l e c t u r e s on g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s ( n e i t h e r Godel, SM n o r E n g l e r ,
LTS i n c l u d e s t h i s e x p r e s s i o n ) .
On t h e o t h e r hand C o s e r i u h a s c o n v i n c i n g l y demonstrated t h a t t h e r e
are, a p a r t from t h e d i s t i n c t i ~ n sa l r e a d y d i s c u s s e d i n t h i s c h a p t e r , a
number of n o t i o n s found i n t h e Cowls which can b e p a r a l l e l e d by s t r i k i n g l y
s i m i l a r ones i n G a b e l e n t z ' s Sprachwissenschaft ( c f . C o s e r i u , 1967:98-9)
t o t h e e x t e n t t h a t i t might no l o n g e r b e maintained t h a t t h e s i m i l a r i t i e s
a r e merely a c c i d e n t a l . 25 However, a s we have p o i n t e d o u t a l r e a d y a t
t h e b e g i n n i n g of t h i s c h a p t e r , G a b e l e n t z ' s o b s e r v a t i o n s were o f t e n made
en passant and r a r e l y t a k e n t o t h e i r c o n c l u s i o n a s f a r a s a methodology
o r , what i s more, a g e n e r a l t h e o r y of language i s concerned. Taken o u t
of c o n t e x t t h e q u o t a t i o n s from G a b e l e n t z ' s Sprachwissenschaft a r e bound
t o s u g g e s t , t o t h e post-Saussurean i n v e s t i g a t o r , many more a f f i n i t i e s
of view, p a r a l l e l i s m of l i n g u i s t i c c o n c e p t s , and a ' s t r u c t u r a l ' outlook
on language t h a n G a b e l e n t z ' s work a s a whole c o n t a i n s . A t y p i c a l example
f o r i n s t a n c e of a m i s l e a d i n g comparison of i s o l a t e d t e x t s i s t o b e found
i n Coseriu's a r t i c l e (e.g. 1967b:99) i n which t h e o b j e c t of l i n g u i s t i c s
a p p e a r s t o b e d e f i n e d b o t h by Gabelentz and S a u s s u r e i n t h e same manner,
i.e. a s comprising a l l m a n i f e s t a t i o n s of human speech (CLG, 20 : Gabe-
l e n t z , 1901:7-8). Those who r e a d f u r t h e r i n t h e a c t u a l t e x t s w i l l f i n d
t h a t S a u s s u r e emphasizes t h e n e c e s s i t y f o r l i n g u i s t i c s t o d e f i n e i t s e l f
( i n c l u d i n g i t s r e l a t i o n t o o t h e r s c i e n c e s , i n p a r t i c u l a r psychology
[ c f . CLG(E), p. 2 0 ] ) , whereas n o t h i n g of t h e k i n d i s t o b e found i n
G a b e l e n t z ' s work ( c f . 1 9 0 1 : l f f . ) . However, t h e s e counter-arguments which
w e h a v e t r i e d t o b r i n g forward a g a i n s t C o s e r i u ' s b o l d a t t e m p t t o p r o v e
t h a t S a u s s u r e was i n f a c t deeply i n f l u e n c e d by G a b e l e n t z ' s work a r e n o t
s t r o n g enough t o i n v a l i d a t e C o s e r i u ' s argument a s a whole. In fact it
h a s t o b e acknowledged t h a t some of t h e i d e a s o u t l i n e d i n G a b e l e n t z ' s
Sprach.wissenschaft could n o t have f a i l e d t o amuse S a u s s u r e ' s i n t e r e s t ,
z t r i p a r t i t i o n between Rede, ~inzeZsprache,
i n p a r t i c u l a r ~ a b e l e n t 's
and Sprachverm6gen, and p o s s i b l y o t h e r concepts a s w e l l which have been
26
r e f e r r e d t o e a r l i e r i n t h i s chapter. Coseriu, i n h i s attempt t o a t t r i -
b u t e t o Gabelentz a p l a c e comparable t o t h a t of Whitney and Durkheim
( s i c . ) , who b o t h a r e o f t e n r e f e r r e d t o a s p r e d e c e s s o r s of S a u s s u r e ' s
l i n g u i s t i c thought (1967b:100), i g n o r e s f o r i n s t a n c e t h e work of P a u l
whose Prinzipien, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n t h e i r second e d i t i o n of 1886 ( f i v e
y e a r s p r i o r t o t h e p u b l i c a t i o n of G a b e l e n t z ' s Sprachwissenschaft, nota
benissime), c o n t a i n s many of t h e i d e a s which C o s e r i u wishes t o a t t r i b u t e
t o Gabelentz: t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between d e s c r i p t i v e and h i s t o r i c a l l i n g u i s t i c s ,
t h e d e s c r i p t i o n of language s t a t e s a s a p r e r e q u i s i t e f o r h i s t o r i c a l
l i n g u i s t i c s , and many o t h e r i d e a s ( c f . 1 . 3 . 2 . 2 ) .
C o s e r i u ' s c l a i m t h a t S a u s s u r e used G a b e l e n t z ' s book (among o t h e r s )
a s a t e x t b o o k w h i l e h e was p r e p a r i n g h i s c o u r s e s on g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s
(1967b:ggf.) i s c e r t a i n l y exaggerated. I n c o n c l u s i o n we b e l i e v e we must
emphasize t h o s e p o i n t s i n C o s e r i u ' s s t u d y i n which h e concedes t h e
s u p e r i o r i t y of S a u s s u r e ' s l i n g u i s t i c views over t h o s e p u t forward by
Gabelentz: 1 ) S a u s s u r e " e s t beaucoup p l u s s y s t 6 m a t i q u e que G a b e l e n t z .
... . Aussi n ' a r r i v e - t - i l [ i . e . G a b e l e n t z ] pas aux c o n c l u s i o n s que
S a u s s u r e t i r e d e c e r t a i n e s prgmisses i n d e n t i q u e s ou presque [ o u r i t a l i c s ] . "
2) S a u s s u r e "emploie une t e r m i n o l o g i e beaucoup plus p r g c i s e e t il d 6 f i n i t
presque t o u j o u r s ~ e x p l i c i t e m e n tl e s n o t i o n s e s s e n t i e l l e s d e s o n syste'me."
3) "Mais, s u r t o u t , il manque 3 Gabelentz l a n o t i o n p r 6 c i s e d e f o n c t i o n a l i t 6
et d'opposition. .. . . . . il n e p a r v i e n t pas l a notion d'opposition
distinctive. On n e t r o u v e r a r i e n chez Gabelentz q u i p u i s s e s t r e compar6
2 l a seconde p a r t i e du CU; ( l i n g u i s t i q u e synchronique) e t , en p a r t i c u l i e r ,
au chapitre sur l e s identit& e t l e s valeurs linguistiques ." (l967b: 91) .
I f and o n l y i f we a c c e p t t h e h y p o t h e s i s t h a t G a b e l e n t z ' s Sprachwissen-
schaft was a major s o u r c e of S a u s s u r e ' s l i n g u i s t i c i n s p i r a t i o n , may we
conclude our d i s c u s s i o n r e g a r d i n g t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between t h e s e two
l i n g u i s t s w i t h a f i n a l q u o t a t i o n from Coseriu: "On conczdera que l e s
i d 6 e s d e Gabelentz no- r e s t e n t pas s a n s m o d i f i c a t i o n s chez S a u s s u r e . Ce
q u i en G a b e l e n t z n ' g t a i t souvent q u ' i n t u i t i o n ou m&e, parf o i s , obser-
v a t i o n m a r g i n a l e d e v i e n t chez S a u s s u r e t h & e e x p l i c i t e m e n t f ormul6e,
p a r t i e d'une s y s t ~ m e . " (1967b:99). One may b e s a f e t o a r g u e t h a t Gabe-
l e n t z v s i n f l u e n c e on S a u s s u r e was probably much s t r o n g e r t h a n contemporary
h i s t o r i e s of l i n g u i s t i c s r e c o g n i z e b u t much l e s s t h a n C o s e r i u , Rensch,
and Zwirner have t r i e d t o prove. Again, S a u s s u r e h a s n o t o n l y shown
h i m s e l f much s u p e r i o r t o a n o t h e r t h e o r e t i c i a n of language of h i s t i m e
b u t , what i s more, a s somebody who developed from i d e a s o f t e n e x p r e s s e d
en passant by h i s contemporaries a g e n e r a l t h e o r y of language q u i t e
d i s s i m i l a r from t h o s e p u t forward p r e v i o u s l y and much more c o h e r e n t t h a n
had h i t h e r t o been conceived of i n Western l i n g u i s t i c t r a d i t o n . To a r g u e ,
a s C o s e r i u and o t h e r s do, t h a t S a u s s u r e derived p a r t i c u l a r i n s i g h t s from
Gabelentz and d i d n o t h i n g e l s e b u t f o r m u l a t e t h e s e i d e a s somewhat more
r i g o r o u s l y would mean n o t o n l y d i s t o r t i n g G a b e l e n t z ' s p r o p o s a l s c o n c e r n i n g
a g e n e r a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n of l i n g u i s t i c phenomena b u t a l s o minimizing
27
Saussure's l i n g u i s t i c genius.
 FOOTNOTES - 1.3.4.2.111.3.4.2.2

1
On him, s . t h e a r t i c l e s by A. Leskien i n ADB 8:286 (1878), and
p a r t i c u l a r l y by Walter B 6 t t g e r i n NDB 6:2-3 (1964). P e d e r s e n who i g n o r e s
G. von d e r Gabelentz makes a t l e a s t mention of Hans Conon (1962:130).
The best-known work of H. C. von d e r Gabelentz i s h i s monograph, ?her
das ?assivwn ( L e i p z i g : S. H i r z e l , 1860), 98 pp., i n which h e c o n s u l t e d
some 200 languages from a l l o v e r t h e world i n o r d e r t o a n a l y z e t h i s
c a t e g o r y i n post-Humboldtian terms.

Cf. t h e works of Malmberg (1964), Kukenheim (1966), Dinneen (1967),

Mounin ( l 9 6 7 ) , Lepschy (19 7O), Waterman (19 70) .
Cf. M. 1viE (1965: 5 5 ) , and Robins (1967: 180) who, however, r e f e r s
t o Gabelentz i n h i s chap. devoted t o comparative and h i s t o r i c a l l i n g u i s -
t i c s , and n o t i n t h e c o n c l u d i n g chap. d e a l i n g w i t h s t r u c t u r a l l i n g u i s t i c s .

Arens (1969:406, 441, 446) makes mention of G a b e l e n t z ' s monograph

of 1901 [= 2nd ed.] i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h d e s c r i p t i v e l i n g u i s t i c s charac-
t e r i s t i c of t h e post-Saussurean e r a ; c f . a l s o T a g l i a v i n i (1963: 78, 1 6 3 ) .

T h i s s t a t e m e n t can b e found towards t h e end of h i s p a p e r , in

Ersatzwort f & 'Syntax1'', i n h i s c o l l e c t i o n , AufsiEtze zur romanischen
Syntax und S t i Z i s t i k (Halle: M. Niemeyer, 1918), p . 345. An o b s e r v a t i o n
t o t h e same e f f e c t was l a t e r made by I o r d a n I O r r (1937:283, n . l ) , and
w i t h a s l i g h t r e v i s i o n i n IordanIBahner (1962:287), and a l s o by C o s e r i u
on s e v e r a l o c c a s i o n s ( c f . C o s e r i u , 1958: 1 3 ; 1962: 282).
6
Copenhagen: A . F. H d s t & s d n , 1928; r e p r . 1968; s e e e s p . 112-3;
t h i s i m p o r t a n t document h a s b e e n i g n o r e d by C o s e r i u , l967b.

'
See R e i c h l i n g , ''What i s General L i n g u i s t i c s ? " , Lingua 1:8-24;
Michels, "Georg von d e r Gabelentz a l s v o o r l o p e r van d e s t r u c t u r e l e t a a l -
kunde en d e f o n o l o g i e " , NTg 45:17-9, and "Verbetering", i b i d . , p. 114
(1952).
8
S. Zwirner, "Sprachen und Sprache: Ein B e i t r a g z u r T h e o r i e d e r
L i n g u i s t i k " , To Honor Roman Jakobson 111, 2442-64; h e r e p. 2442.

There a r e no i n d i c a t i o n s t h a t FdS took n o t e of Gabelentz when

h e s t u d i e d a t L e i p z i g (1876-78, 1879180); i t i s t h e r e f o r e m i s l e a d i n g
when Zwirner (1969: 38) speaks of Gabelentz a s " s e i n e s [ i . e . FdS ' s ]
L e i p z i g e r und B e r l i n e r Lehrers", a c o n t e n t i o n r e p e a t e d by Georg S t E t z e l
i n 1970 (Poetica 3: 1 7 ) .
 lo One could add a number of l i n g u i s t s who were c o n t e m p o r a r i e s
of Gabelentz who d i d n o t enjoy t 9 e r e c o g n i t i o n t h e y deserved; Baudouin
d e Courtenay, Kruszewski, F r i e d r i c h Techmer (1843-91), and F. N. F i n c k
(1867-1910) may b e c i t e d a s t h e most s t r i k i n g examples. However, i t
i s n o t t h e t a s k of our p r e s e n t s t u d y t o p r e s e n t a c o u n t e r - h i s t o r y of
l i n g u i s t i c s c i e n c e of t h e 19 t h c e n t u r y .
11
L e i p z i g : T. 0 . Weigel, 1891, xx + 502 pp.; 2nd ed., p r e p a r e d
by A l b r e c h t Graf von d e r Schulenburg (ibid. : C. H. T a u c h n i t z , l g o l ) ,
x x i + 520 pp. We s h a l l q u o t e from t h e 2nd s l i g h t l y emended and updated
ed. of 1901 which was r e p r . i n 1969 ( ~ i i b i n g e n : Verlag ~ i i b i n g e r~ e i t r g g e
z u r L i n g u i s t i k ) . A comparison of t h e 2nd ed. w i t h t h e f i r s t of 1891
shows t h a t t h e s e c t i o n s d e a l i n g w i t h p r i n c i p l e s of language s t u d y d i d
n o t remain unchanged. I n f a c t Schulenburg (1865-1902) , t h e n " P r i v a t -
docent f i i r o s t a s i a t i s c h e Sprachen" a t t h e U n i v e r s i t y of Munich, n o t o n l y
updated l i n g u i s t i c m a t e r i a l from h i s own a r e a of r e s e a r c h b u t a l s o ,
a s we s h a l l s e e i n t h e f o l l o w i n g p a r a g r a p h s , made e s s e n t i a l components
of G a b e l e n t z ' s l i n g u i s t i c argument much more e x p l i c i t . S i n c e we u s e t h e
2nd r e v . ed. of 1901, which h a s r e c e n t l y b e e n r e p r i n t e d (Tiibingen: TBL,
1969), we s h a l l f o l l o w C o s e r i u ' s (1967b:76) p r a c t i c e by marking w i t h
a n a s t e r i s k immediately p r e c e d i n g t h e q u o t a t i o n t h o s e p a s s a g e s which
were n o t c o n t a i n e d i n t h e 1891 e d i t i o n . A comparison between t h e 1891
and t h e 1901 ed. r e v e a l s t h a t about t h e e q u i v a l e n t of c l o s e t o 80 p r i n t e d
pages ( i f t h e l a y o u t of t h e 1st ed. i s t a k e n a s a b a s i s ) have b e e n added
by Schulenburg. S u b s t a n t i a l a d d i t i o n s have been made on t h e f o l l o w i n g
pages: 10, 11-3, 15-6, 1 7 , 28-9, 30, 31, 32, 39, 46, 49, 51, 53, 59,
60-61, 63, 64, 75-7, 80, 84, 109, 135, 136, 140-41, [ ... 1 , 303-4,
313, 327, 328-34 [ ! I , 338-34 [ ! 1, 344, [ ... 1, 386-7, [ ... 1, 439,
446, [ ... 1, 478-9, 481, 484. Note t h a t n o t a l l a d d i t i o n s h a v e been
l i s t e d h e r e ; t h e s q u a r e b r a c k e t s i n d i c a t e t h a t a number of p a s s a g e s have
n o t b e e n s c r u t i n i z e d . Two o b s e r v a t i o n s a r e worth p o i n t i n g o u t : 1 )
Schulenburg r e t a i n e d almost every s e n t e n c e of t h e o r i g i n a l ; minor s t y l i s t i c
r e v i s i o n s have b e e n made on pp. 52 and 113, and on p. 387 f i v e l i n e s
of t h e 1891 ed. have been o m i t t e d . 2) Large a d d i t i o n s were made e s p e c i a l l y
on o c c a s i o n s where Humboldtian i d e a s a r e d e a l t w i t h ( c f . pp. 76, 328-34,
338-43, 439).

l2 Cf. t h e e x c e r p t s of FdS's m s . of 1891 ( c f . SM, 36) made i n CFS

12:65-7 (1954); i t i s i n t e r e s t i n g t o n o t e t h a t FdS t h e n m a i n t a i n e d t h e
f o l l o w i n g : "Langue e t l a n g a g e n e s o n t qu'une mzme chose; l ' u n e s t l a
g&&alisation de l'autre." (p. 6 5 ) .

l3Godel (who must b e c r i t i c i z e d f o r having m i s r e p r e s e n t e d i n form

[ p a r t l y c o r r e c t e d by De Mauro, 1 9 7 0 : x x x i i i l and s u b s t a n c e t h e s u g g e s t i o n s
p u t forward by K. H. Rensch i n 1966) h a s r e c e n t l y made t h e f o l l o w i n g s t a t e -
ment r e g a r d i n g ~ a b e l e n t z ' sSprachwissenschaft and i d e a s e x p r e s s e d i n t h e
CLG: "On p e u t d ' a i l l e u r s ~ i g n a l e rd ' a u t r e s [ i . e . a p a r t from t h e synchrony/
diachrony dichotomy] concordances. S a u s s u r e p o s s g d a i t dans s a b i b l i o -
t h s q u e un e x e m p l a i r e d e l ' o u v r a g e . I1 a du l e l i r e , ou au moins par-
c o u r i r . Mais il n e l ' a jamais c i t 6 ; ... " (1968:116-7), and Godel
goes on t o r e f e r t o FdS's a f f i r m a t i o n of 1894 t h a t h e had h e l d f o r many
y e a r s t h a t l i n g u i s t i c s i s a d o u b l e s c i e n c e - t o which a r e f e r e n c e w a s
e x p l i c i t l y made by Rensch i n Phonetica 15:39, n.14 (1966)! - a d d i n g t h a t
FdS would have acknowledged h i s 'indebtedness t o Gabelentz had h e owed
him p e r t i n e n t i d e a s a s h e d i d i n t h e c a s e of Whitney, B d C , and K r u s z e w s k i .
We b e l i e v e t h a t t h e l a t t e r argument cannot b e s e r i o u s l y upheld i n view
of t h e f a c t t h a t o n l y a l i m i t e d number of n o t e s from FdS h i m s e l f have
been p r e s e r v e d.
14
Zwirner h a s made h i s c l a i m s r e p e a t e d l y : 1 ) P[S]ICPS, 7-9 (1965);
2) Phonometrie I , 8 1 , 101-3, 109, 166 (1966); 3) CLTA 3: 189-90 (1966);
4) To Honor Roman Jakobson 111, 2445-6 (1967) ; 5 ) Phonometrie 11, x i v
(1968); 6) F r a n k f w t e r AZZgemeine Zeitung (Saturday, Oct. 11, 1969),
and 7) Sprache der Gegenwart V , 31, 35-6 (1969).

l5 S. Rensch's paper, "Ferdinand d e S a u s s u r e und Georg von d e r

Gabelentz: ijb e r e i n s t i m m ~ n ~ eund
n Gemeinsamkeiten d a r g e s t e l l t a n d e r
l a n g u e - p a r o l e Dichotomie sowie d e r d i a c h r o n i s c h e n und s y n c h r o n i s c h e n
Sprachbetrachtung", Phonetica 15:32-41 (1966); s . a l s o h i s remarks,
ibid. 16: 78-9 (1967) .
l6 "Georg von d e r ~ a b e l e n t ze t l a l i n g u i s t i q u e synchronique", Word
23: 74-100 (1967 [ l 9 6 9 ] ) ; C o s e r i u does n o t mention e i t h e r Zwirner o r Rensch
i n h i s paper.

l7We may n o t e en passant t h a t FdS (CLG, 26) s p e a k s of " g e g l i e d e r t e

Sprache" when h e d i s c u s s e s language as t h e o b j e c t of l i n g u i s t i c s (CLG,
23-7); t h e c r i t i c a l ed. r e v e a l s t h a t FdS s a i d i n f a c t I1gegZiederte Sprache
ou Rede" (CLG(E), 35) .
l8 Gabelentz adds: "Sprache i n diesem S i n n e i s r n i c h t sowohl d i e
Gesammtheit a l l e r Reden d e s Volkes, d e r C l a s s e oder d e s Einzelnen, -
a l s vielmehr d i e Gesammtheit d e r j e n i g e n F z h i g k e i t e n und Neigungen, welche
d i e Form, d e r j e n i g e n s a c h l i c h e n V o r s t e l l u n g e n , welche den S t o f f d e r
Rede bestimrnen." He t h u s r e l a t e s language t o speech i n t h e s e n s e t h a t
speech (Rede) i s t h e a c t u a l i z a t i o n of language (which Gabelentz terms
.
somewhat m i s l e a d i n g l y " ~ i n z e l s p r a c h e " )

l9 Godel's g l o s s a r y (SM, 252-81) does n o t c o n t a i n a s p e c i a l e n t r y

r e f e r r i n g t o ' f a c u l t $ du l a n g a g e ' a s opposed t o E n g l e r ' s (LTS, 24),
b u t c i t e s s t u d e n t s ' n o t e s t o t h e same e f f e c t under ' l a n g a g e ' (SM, 266).
R i e d l i n g e r had n o t e d from t h e second course: "La f a c u l t 6 du l a n g a g e
est un f a i t d i s t i n c t d e l a langue, mais q u i n e p e u t s ' e x e r c e r s a n s e l l e " .

20 C o s e r i u (1967b:79) p o i n t s o u t t h a t langue a s a s o c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n
does n o t always correspond ;o langue a s a syst e m (of s i g n s ) i n FdS 's
t h e o r i e s and h e r e f e r s t o a s t u d y of h i s own i n which h e d i s c u s s e s t h i s
problem ( c f . C o s e r i u , 1962:43-62). We s h a l l t r e a t t h i s t o p i c i n P a r t I1
of o u r s t u d y ( c f . 2 . 2 . 1 . 2 ) .

21 G. Mounin r e p o r t s t h a t t h e r e a r e 138 o c c u r r e n c e s of 'system' i n

t h e CLG; c f . h i s a r t i c l e , "La n o t i o n d e systsme chez Antoine M e i l l e t " ,
Linguistique 2.1:17-29 (1966); h e r e p. 24. We b e l i e v e t h a t G a b e l e n t z ' s
u s e of " a n a l y t i s c h e s n and " s y n t h y t i s c h e s System" (1901: 84-104 [passim])
h a s n o t h i n g t o do w i t h t h e s e m a n t i c s of FdS's u s e of t h e term. (For a
d e f i n i t i o n of t h e s e e x p r e s s i o n s , s e e Gabelentz, 1901: 9 3 ) .

22 According t o Mounin, op. c i t . , p. 25, t h e r e a r e 11 o c c u r r e n c e s

of t h e term 'organism' i n t h e CLG.

23 T h i s s i m i l a r i t y was n o t i c e d by F r i e d r i c h Kainz a s e a r l y a s i n
1941 i n v o l . I of h i s Psychologie der Sprache (3rd ed., S t u t t g a r t : F.
Enke, 1962) - a n o t h e r p u b l i c a t i o n overlooked by Coseriu (1967b) - who
b e l i e v e s i t t o b e " e i n Akt g e s c h i c h t l i c h e r G e r e c h t i g k e i t d a r a u f h i n -
zuweisen, d a s s ' e i n e s e h r g h n l i c h e S p a l t u n g [ a s FdS's d i s t i n c t i o n between
Zangage, kngue, and parole] schon v o r h e r b e i GabeZentz a n z u t r e f f en i s t"
(P. 20)

24 S i g n i f i c a n t l y t h e v e r y e x t e n s i v e i n d e x of G a b e l e n t z ' s Sprach-
wissenschaft (1901:487-520) does n o t l i s t " g l e i c h z e i t i g " though a number
of e t y m o l o g i c a l l y r e l a t e d terms, e . g . " G l e i c h a r t i g k e i t " , " G l e i c h h e i t " ,
"Gleichklanggef;ihl", e t c . , a r e i n c l u d e d (p. 498) .
25 Cf. Gabelentz: "der Lauf d e r Rede i s t b e k a n n t l i c h g e r a d l i n i g "
(1961:85) - Saussure: " [ l e s ] 616ments ...
forment un c h a h e " (CLG,
103) and " l a c h a h e phonique a pour premier c a r a c t s r e d ' z t r e l i n 6 a i r e f '
(CLG, 1 4 5 ) ; t h e comparison of language w i t h money (Gabelentz, 1901:55,
98 - CLG, 164); b o t h l i n g u i s t s a f f i r m t h a t t h e s p e a k e r a p p l i e s t h e r u l e s
of language unconsciously (Gabelentz, 1901: 31, 33 - CLG, 106, lO7), e t c .

26 K. H. Rensch's s t a t e m e n t t h a t FdS's d i s t i n c t i o n between syn-

c h r o n i c and d i a c h r o n i c l i n g u i s t i c s " f i n d e t s i c h b e r e i t s " i n G a b e l e n t z ' s
work of 1891 ( c f . Phonetics 15:36 [1966]) i s m i s l e a d i n g f o r a t l e a s t
two r e a s o n s : ( a ) i t s u g g e s t s (we b e l i e v e wrongly) t h a t FdS d e r i v e d t h i s
concept from Gabelentz, and (b) t h a t Gabelentz was t h e f i r s t t o make
such a d i s t i n c t i o n .

27 See a l s o o u r forthcoming review of t h e r e c e n t r e p r i n t of G a b e l e n t z ' s

book (Tcbingen: TBL, 1969), which a l s o i n c l u d e s C o s e r i u ' s paper of 1967,
i n Lingua, v o l 28 (1971).
1.3.4.3 F. N . Finck and Some General C o n s i d e r a t i o n s Concerning
Language D e s c r i p t i o n

Franz NikoZaus Finck (1867-19 l o ) , both i n

a theoretical essay (1905) and i n a l i t t l e
volume (1910) i n which he analyzed descrip-
t i v e l y eight u n r e k t e d languages, i n s i s t e d
upon descriptive study as a b a s i s for both
h i s t o r i c a l research and philosophical gen-
e r a l i z a t i o n . Ferdinand de Saussure (1857-
1913) had for years expounded t h i s matter
i n h i s university Zectwles ...
Leonard Bloomfield (1933:19)

It a p p e a r s t o have been Bloomfield, h i m s e l f a p u p i l of A . L e s k i e n

a t L e i p z i g i n 1913, who i n t h e i n t r o d u c t o r y c h a p t e r of h i s p r i n c i p a l
work f i r s t l i n k e d t h e B e r l i n p r o f e s s o r of g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s , F. N.
Finck, w i t h Saussure. However, a number of l i n g u i s t s have s i n c e s u g g e s t e d
t h a t F i n c k and o t h e r s c h o l a r s a n t i c i p a t e d c e r t a i n i d e a s S a u s s u r e t a u g h t
i n h i s c o u r s e s on g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s . It i s f o r t h i s r e a s o n t h a t F i n c k
h a s been i n c l u d e d i n t h e p r e s e n t i n v e s t i g a t i o n . Yet t h e i n c l u s i o n of
F i n c k i s much more f o r t h e s a k e of completeness and b e c a u s e of h i s a s s o -
c i a t i o n w i t h t h e Humboldtian t r a d i t i o n . We do n o t b e l i e v e t h a t F i n c k ' s
work h a s played a n important r i j l e i n t h e development of S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r y .
F i n c k ' s i n f l u e n c e was a t b e s t remote a l t h o u g h i t h a s r e c e n t l y been e s t a b -
l i s h e d t h a t S a u s s u r e owned a copy of F i n c k ' s l a s t book Die Haupttypen
des Sprachbaus ( s . De Mauro, 1968:361) and might w e l l have been a c q u a i n t e d
1
w i t h e a r l i e r w r i t i n g s by t h e same s c h o l a r .
I n t h e p r e f a c e of h i s Haupttypen of 1910 Finck s t a t e d t h a t h e had
a t f i r s t i n t e n d e d t o p r o v i d e a n i n t r o d u c t i o n t o t h e approach t o l a n g u a g e
i n a u g u r a t e d by Humboldt and developed by o t h e r s such a s S t e i n t h a l , M i s t e l i ,
Byrne, b u t t h a t h e soon f e l t h e had formed i d e a s of h i s own which m e r i t e d
p r e s e n t a t i o n to' an a u d i e n c e l a r g e r t h a n t h a t of h i s s t u d e n t s . * The g o a l
of h i s s t u d y was t o s u g g e s t a way of e x p l a i n i n g t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of
a g i v e n language by e l u c i d a t i n g t h e mental q u a l i t i e s ( " g e i s t i g e E i g e n a r t " )
 peculiar t o i t s n a t i v e speakers. F i n c k chose e i g h t t o t a l l y u n r e l a t e d
languages t o p r o v e t h a t a c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of t h e languages of t h e world
along thcsc l i n c s i s possible. Therc can b e no doubt t h a t h e was t r y i n g
t o d e m o n s t r a t e t h e c o r r e c t n e s s of Humboldt's s u g g e s t i o n s c o n c e r n i n g t h e
'I
i n n e r e Sprachform", a problem which had occupied Finck f o r more t h a n t h e
3
l a s t t e n y e a r s of h i s s h o r t l i f e .
The most v a l u a b l e s o u r c e of F i n c k ' s g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c views i s
h i s o u t l i n e , Die Aufgabe und GZiederung der Sprachwissenschaft, which
appeared i n 1 9 0 5 . ~ I n t h i s programmatic book F i n c k ' s s e a r c h f o r t h e
' i n n e r form' of language c o n s t i t u t e s t h e c e n t r a l q u e s t i o n of t h e i n q u i r y ,
a g o a l which, a s Finck (1905:35-6) r e c o g n i z e s h i m s e l f , cannot b e a t t a i n e d
by t h e l i n g u i s t a l o n e b u t needs t h e a s s i s t a n c e of ethnology. Finck who
proposed a c l a r i f i c a t i o n of t h i s Humboldtian n o t i o n (1905:33) d e c l a r e d
a t t h e same t i m e t h a t t h e p r i n c i p a l t a s k of l i n g u i s t i c s s h o u l d b e t h e i n -
v e s t i g a t i o n and d e s c r i p t i o n of languages i n o r d e r t o u l t i m a t e l y e x p l a i n
t h e p e c u l i a r i t y of a l l u t t e r a n c e s by means of t h e i n t e l l e c t u a l p a r t i -
c u l a r i t y of t h e p e o p l e who speak t h e language i n q u e s t i o n . 5 Such a n
aim, we b e l i e v e , which i s based on t h e e r r o n e o u s (Humboldtian) assumption
t h a t language and thought a r e e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l l y i d e n t i c a l , t e n d s t o
r e g a r d l i n g u i s t i c s a s an a n c i l l a r y s c i e n c e t o anthropology, and t h i s i s
i n s h a r p c o n t r a s t t o what S a u s s u r e a t t e m p t e d t o do, i . e . the definition
of l i n g u i s t i c s as having t h e i n v e s t i g a t i o n of language f o r t h e l a n g u a g e ' s
, sake a s its proper object.
On t h e o t h e r hand Finck showed h i m s e l f v e r y much aware of t h e s h o r t -
comings of t h e methodology of h i s t o r i c a l grammar a s i t was p u t forward
by h i s c o n t e m p o r a r i e s . Thus h e c r i t i c i z e s h i s t o r i c a l l i n g u i s t i c s f o r
t r a c i n g back c e r t a i n forms of speech by p u t t i n g two o r more forms of
speech one b e s i d e t h e o t h e r i n s t e a d of o f f e r i n g a n e x p l a n a t i o n of how
forms of s t a g e A of a g i v e n language have developed t o forms of a g i v e n
s t a g e B; d i s t i n g u i s h i n g c l e a r l y between h i s t o r i c a l grammar and d e s c r i p t i v e
l i n g u i s t i c s Finck s t a t e s :

... D i e h i s t o r i s c h e Grammatik, w i e s i e Mode i s t , u n t e r s c h e i d e t

s i c h a l s o von d e r sogenannten r e i n beschreibenden dadurch, d a s s
s i e e i n e n unm6glichen Kausalzusammenhang v o r t g u s c h t , [ a d d i n g
t h a t p r e h i s t o r i c a l l i n g u i s t s adds t o t h i s c o n f u s i o n by i n t r o -
d u c i n g a number of unknown q u a n t i t i e s 1. (1905: 16) .
But t h i s o b s e r v a t i o n was o n l y t o b e of m a r g i n a l i n t e r e s t t o Finck s i n c e
h e i n f a c t d e f i n e d t h e t a s k of i e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s t o b e t h a t of ex-
p l a i n i n g t h e s p e c i f i c f o r m a t i o n of t h e speech of each approximately uni-
form l i n g u i s t i c community.6 F i n c k ' s u s e of t h e term "Rede" a s w e l l a s
h i s r e q u e s t f o r t h e i n v e s t i g a t i o n of a k i n d of l i n g u i s t i c a v e r a g e of a
7
g i v e n speech community does n o t , a s De Mauro (1968: 350) and C o s e r i u
(1962:282) s u g g e s t e d , i n any r e s p e c t a n t i c i p a t e S a u s s u r e ' s c o n c e p t of
parole which may b e e x p l a i n e d w i t h t h e h e l p of t h e d e s c r i p t i o n of langue.
F i n c k ' s p r o p o s a l s l e a d t o a f i e l d of r e s e r a r c h o u t s i d e l i n g u i s t i c s p r o p e r
o r , perhaps more c o r r e c t l y , t o an o v e r a l l s c i e n c e of human m e n t a l a c t i v i t y
i n which l i n g u i s t i c s c o n s t i t u t e s n o t h i n g b u t a p r o v i n c e ( c f . n . 6 ) .
What may b e worth mentioning, i n a d d i t i o n t o t h e g e n e r a l emphasis on t h e
m e n t a l c h a r a c t e r of l i n g u i s t i c i n v e s t i g a t i o n , i s F i n c k ' s c o n t r a s t between
a l i n g u i s t i c s which i s c o n f i n e d t o i n d i v i d u a l p a r t s of language and i t s
mechanism and what h e c a l l s g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s . Once a g a i n , we f a i l
t o s e e a p a r a l l e l between h i s c o n c e p t i o n o f g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s and t h a t
of S a u s s u r e . Finck (1905:19) s t r e s s e s t h e n e c e s s i t y of e s t a b l i s h i n g
a s u r v e y of t h e sum t o t a l of l i n g u i s t i c e x p r e s s i o n s b e f o r e a p a r t i c u l a r
language can b e analyzed a c c o r d i n g t o i t s s p e c i a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s ; S a u s s u r e
n o t e d on t h e o t h e r hand, a s e a r l y a s 1891, t h a t j u s t t h o s e l i n g u i s t s
such a s F r i e d r i c h ~ Z l l e r(1834-98) who were f a m i l i a r w i t h a g r e a t number
of languages, i n c l u d i n g many e x o t i c ones, n e v e r d i d propose a g e n e r a l
t h e o r y of language, whereas o t h e r s who s p e c i a l i z e d i n a p a r t i c u l a r branch
of languages of t h e Indo-European f a m i l y were much c l o s e r t o s e t t i n g
up t h e g e n e r a l p r i n c i p l e s of language s t u d y ( c f . CFS 12:66). As the
C o w s r e v e a l s S a u s s u r e d i d n o t deduce g e n e r a l p r i n c i p l e s of l i n g u i s t i c
d e s c r i p t i o n from a v a s t amount of d a t a b u t proposed t h e o r e t i c a l c o n c e p t s
which might a p p l y t o t h e mechanism of language i n g e n e r a l . The emphasis
on langue which i s conceived of a s an a b s t r a c t system u n d e r l y i n g v e r b a l
e x p r e s s i o n and t h e communicational p r o c e s s ( c f . CLG, 27-32 [passim])
r a t h e r t h a n t h e i n v e s t i g a t i o n of l a r g e q u a n t i t i e s of speech u t t e r a n c e s
i s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of S a u s s u r e ' s approach t o l i n g u i s t i c s .
Another major f e a t u r e of F i n c k ' s l i n g u i s t i c a c t i v i t y i s concerned
w i t h language c l a s s i f i c a t i o n . T h i s i s a n o t h e r i m p o r t a n t component of
Humboldt's g e n e r a l t h e o r y of language d e s c r i p t i o n which played a n impor-
t a n t p a r t i n t h e l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r i e s of h i s f o l l o w e r s from S t e i n t h a l t o
E r n s t Lewy (1881-1966), b u t which d i d n o t a t t r a c t S a u s s u r e ' s i n t e r e s t
t o a l a r g e e x t e n t a s h i s work r e v e a l s . I n accordance w i t h t h e p r o c e d u r e s
advocated i n h i s 1905 t r e a t i s e Finck s t a r t s w i t h t h e accumulation and
o r d e r i n g of h i s d a t a b e f o r e s e t t i n g o u t t o p r e s e n t p e r t i n e n t a s p e c t s
I n Die Sprachst'%rune des Erdkreises of 1909 F i n c k a r r a n g e s
of h i s f i n d i n g s .
t h e languages of t h e world a c c o r d i n g t o g e n e a l o g i c a l p r i n c i p l e s ; 9 i n
h i s monograph of t h e f o l l o w i n g y e a r , Die Haupttypen des Sprachbaus,
h e e x e m p l i f i e s h i s views concerning t h e s t r u c t u r a l d i v e r s i t y of languages
w i t h t h e h e l p of morphological c l a s s i f i c a t i o n and a comparison of e i g h t
completely u n r e l a t e d languages. lo However, what F i n c k i n t e n d s t o f i n d
o u t e v e n t u a l l y , namely t h a t t h e l i n g u i s t i c t y p e of a g i v e n language
r e f l e c t s t h e minds of t h e s o c i a l group who s p e a k s i t , i s c l e a r l y r e j e c t e d
by S a u s s u r e who a r g u e s t h a t p s y c h o l o g i c a l c a u s e s do n o t n e c e s s a r i l y under-
l i e l i n g u i s t i c p r o c e d u r e s (CLG, 310-1). I n f a c t S a u s s u r e c i t e s a number
of examples t o r e f u t e h i s i d e a ; h e concedes t h a t i t would n o t b e w i t h o u t
i n t e r e s t t o d e t e r m i n e t h e grammatical t y p e of languages and t o c l a s s i f y
languages a c c o r d i n g t o t h e manner i n which they e x p r e s s thought b u t
S a u s s u r e p o i n t s out t h a t t h e s e d e t e r m i n a t i o n s and c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s do n o t
p e r m i t a c c u r a t e c o n c l u s i o n s o u t s i d e t h e domain of l i n g u i s t i c s p r o p e r
(CLG, 312; c f . a l s o (CLG(E), 506).
These o b s e r v a t i o n s show c l e a r l y how f a r away from t h e Humboldtian
t r a d i t i o n S a u s s u r e a c t u a l l y was. While n e v e r r e j e c t i n g t h e i n t r i n s i c
m e n t a l c h a r a c t e r of language h e always a t t e m p t e d t o draw a l i n e between
t h e o b j e c t of l i n g u i s t i c s c i e n c e and t h e f u n c t i o n of language o u t s i d e
t h e s t r i c t l y l i n g u i s t i c s p h e r e of t h e communicational p r o c e s s . Saussure's
r e j e c t i o n of p r i n c i p a l t e n e t s of Humboldtian i d e a s on t h e grounds t h a t
t h e y t e n d t o assume much more t h a n l i n g u i s t i c s can p r o v i d e e v i d e n c e f o r ,
11
i t should b e n o t e d , d a t e s back t o 1894 and probably much e a r l i e r
12
and p r i o r t o any of F i n c k ' s l i n g u i s t i c p u b l i c a t i o n s . Saussure's a t t i -
t u d e i s e v i d e n t from h i s remarks concerning t h e l i n g u i s t i c work of Hum-
b o l d t i n 1908 ( c f . SET, 51) an,d t h e e l o q u e n t absence of r e f e r e n c e s t o
Humboldt's work i n h i s c o u r s e s on g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s . It i s t r u e t h a t
neo-Humboldtians, i n p a r t i c u l a r T r i e r and Weisgerber, owe some of t h e i r
, 13
i n s i g h t s r e g a r d i n g t h e s e m a n t i c s i d e of language t o Saussure; t o argue
t h a t S a u s s u r e i n t u r n d e r i v e d s p e c i f i c i d e a s concerning t h e n a t u r e of
l a n g u a g e from F i n c k , f o r example, i s c e r t a i n l y beyond t h e p o i n t .
 FOOTNOTES - 1.3.4.3

On F i n c k s e e E r n s t Lewy i n NDB 5:148-9 (1961), and E. F. K. Koerner,

"Franz Nikolaus F i n c k (1867-1910): Zur 60. Wiederkehr des Todestages
e i n e s g r o s s e n S p r a c h w i s s e n s c h a f t l e r s aus dem Niederrhein", Der Nieder-
rhein ( K r e f e l d ) 37: 91-4 (1970) .
See Die Haupttypen des Sprachbaus (Leipzig: B . G. Tuebner, 1910;
5 t h unchanged ed., S t u t t g a r t : i b i d . , l 9 6 5 ) , p. v i i .

Cf. t h e c o l l e c t i o n of e i g h t p a p e r s d e l i v e r e d a t Marburg U n i v e r s i t y
where Finck had become " P r i v a t d o z e n t " of Indo-European and g e n e r a l l i n -
g u i s t i c s i n 189 6, Der deutsche Sprachbau aZs Ausdruck deutscher We2t-
anschauung (Marburg: N . G. Elwert , 1899) ; Die KZassifikation der Sprachen
( i b i d . , 1 9 0 1 ) , b o t h of which were reviewed by Schuchardt i n LGRP, c o l l .
274-9 (1902) and, much more p o s i t i v e l y , by H e i n r i c h Winkler i n A f d A
27: 288-305.

H a l l e / S . : R. Haupt, v i i i + 55 pp.

Finck s a y s : " . . . d i e Eigenmt a l l e s Sprechens a u s g e i s t i g e r

E i g e n a r t zu e r k l z r e n . " (1905:36). C f . a l s o t h e q u o t a t i o n i n n o t e 6.
6
The r e l e v a n t p a s s a g e from Finck (1905: 19) r u n s a s f o l l o w s : "Die
Aufgabe d e r S p r a c h w i s s e n s c h a f t i s t a l s o , d i e besondere GestaZtung d e r
Rede j e d e r a n n ' a e r n d g l e i c h m h s i g sprechenden Gemeinschaft a u s d e r e n
g e i s t i g e r Eigenart zu e r k l z r e n , und i m Gegensatz zu d e r auf e i n z e l n e
T e i l e d e s S p r a c h l e b e n s b e s c h r k k t e n Forschung Eag d i e s e , d i e zwecks
F e s t s t e l l u n g d e s E i g e n a r t i g e n notwendig e i n e n U b e r b l i c k iiber d i e Gesamt-
h e i t v o r a u s s e t z t , aZZgemeine S p r a c h w i s s e n s c h a f t h e i s s e n . "

' De Mauro i s wrong when h e p o i n t s out t h a t K a r l J a b e r g had sug-

g e s t e d t h a t Finck a n t i c i p a t e d FdS's langue/paroZe dichotomy; n o r i s
De Mauro's page r e f e r e n c e c o r r e c t . C f . J a b e r g ' s Sprachwissenschaft-
l i c h e Forschungen und ErZebnisse v o l . I, 2nd ed. (Berne: Francke, 19 6 5 ) ,
pp. 123-36, e s p . p. 128.

.
Cf h i s s t u d y , Der Bau der europiiischen Sprachen, 2nd ed. (Tiibingen:
M. Niemeyer, 1964).
9
L e i p z i g : B. 6. Teubner, 1909; 3 r d unchanged ed., 1923.

lo S e e a l s o H e i n r i c h Winkler's review a r t i c l e , "Die Haupttypen des

Sprachbaus", Memon ( L e i p z i g ) 6:59-80 (1912).
 ''
Cf. CLG(E), 505-6; i t a p p e a r s t h a t CLG, 310-2 i s m a i n l y b a s e d
on FdS's o b s e r v a t i o n s of 1894. ,
12 F i n c k t s e a r l i e s t l i n g u i s t i c (he p u b l i s h e d l i t e r a r y w r i t i n g s of
his own i n 1 8 9 1 and 1893) work i s , t o o u r knowledge, a s h o r t monograph,
@er das verhzltnis des baZtisch-sZavischen NominaZaccents zum Urindo-
germanisehen (Marburg: N . G. E l w e r t , 1895) .
l3 Both l i n g u i s t s aclinowledged t h e i r d e b t t o FdS, T r i e r i n w r i t i n g
( c f . h i s Der deutsche Wortschatz i m Sinnbezirk des Verstandes: Die Ges-
chichte eines sprachzichen FeZdes [ H e i d e l b e r g : C. W i n t e r , 19311, p . 1 1 )
and W e i s g e r b e r o r a l l y ( c f . P e t e r Hartmann, Wesen und Wirkung der Sprache
i m SpiegeZ der Theorie Leo Weisgerbers [ i b i d . , 19 581, p 20) . .
1.4 Concluding Remarks on the F i r s t Part of the Investigation
,
I n t h e preceding c h a p t e r s of our s t u d y we have aLtempted t o s e t
o u t t h e paradigm of i n v e s t i g a t i o n which r e l a t e s t o t h e f o l l o w i n g aims:
1 ) To p o i n t t o t h e i m p o r t a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p between S a u s s u r e ' s work and
h i s biography (1.1); 2) t o s u g g e s t t h e n e c e s s i t y of e s t a b l i s h i n g t h e
g e n e r a l e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l s i t u a t i o n of S a u s s u r e ' s t i m e i n o r d e r t o e v a l u a t e
a p p r o p r i a t e l y t h e v a r i o u s p o t e n t i a l i n f l u e n c e s on h i s t h e o r i z i n g ( 1 . 2 ) ;
3 ) t o d i s c u s s , t a k i n g i n t o account t h e i n t e l l e c t u a l paradigm of t h e l a t e
1 9 t h c e n t u r y , t h e p o s s i b i l i t y of e x t r a - l i n g u i s t i c i n f l u e n c e s on S a u s s u r e
(1.2.2 and 1 . 2 . 3 ) , and 4 ) t o demonstrate various important l i n g u i s t i c
s o u r c e s of S a u s s u r e ' s i n s p i r a t i o n ( 1 . 3 ) . With r e f e r e n c e t o t h e f i r s t
a i m , n o t much needs t o b e added e x c e p t f o r t h e f a c t t h a t s t i l l t o o l i t t l e
i s known about S a u s s u r e ' s l i f e and h i s e x t r a - c u r r i c u l a r a c t i v i t i e s t o
g i v e a f u l l y s a t i s f y i n g a c c o u n t of h i s n o n - l i n g u i s t i c i n t e r e s t s and how
t h e y r e l a t e d t o h i s o u t l o o k on language and i t s s t u d y . It i s i n t h i s
c o n n e c t i o n , b u t a l s o w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t of a n epistemo-
l o g i c a l paradigm of t h e p e r i o d between 1870 and 1910 i n Western Europe,
t h a t i t a p p e a r s d e s i r a b l e t o e s t a b l i s h which was t h e c a t h o l i c n a t u r e
of t h e books S a u s s u r e had i n h i s l i b r a r y , i n p a r t i c u l a r t h o s e many volumes
1
which a p p a r e n t l y t r e a t e d s u b j e c t s o t h e r t h a n l i n g u i s t i c s .
The second g o a l of our i n q u i r y , i . e . t o s k e t c h o u t i n which way t h e
i n t e l l e c t u a l atmosphere p r e v a i l i n g d u r i n g t h e l a s t t h r e e decades of t h e
p a s t c e n t u r y and t h e f i r s t of t h e 20th c e n t u r y ought t o b e p r e s e n t e d ,
h a s b e e n a much more d i f f i c u l t t a s k . Not even now i s t h e r e a n y t h i n g i n
l i n g u i s t i c s c i e n c e comparable t o Thomas S. Kuhn's !7%e Structure of
2
S c i e n t i f i c RevoZutions of 1962 f o r t h e n a t u r a l s c i e n c e s . Linguistics,
a s c i e n c e b e l o n g i n g t o t h e much more v e r b a l and t h e r e f o r e l e s s e a s i l y
a c c e s s i b l e of t h e human a r t s , b u t much more prone t o a t t i m e s almost
u n n o t i c e a b l e changes, r e f l e c t s t o a c e r t a i n d e g r e e t h e accomplishments
of t h e s c i e n c e s i n s o f a r a s t h e y have some immediate b e a r i n g on t h e s o c i a l ,
economic o r p o l i t i c a l c l i m a t e . Anybody who endeavours t o map o u t some-
t h i n g l i k e t h e i n t e l l e c t u a l paradigm of a g i v e n p e r i o d may e a s i l y b e
drowned i n t h e primary m a t e r i a l a v a i l a b l e u n l e s s h e h a s f i r s t developed
a t h e o r y of how such a problem s h o u l d b e approached o r h a s been f o r t u n a t e
enough t o b e endowed w i t h t h e eriviable t a l e n t which p e r m i t s him t o make
the appropriate selection^.^ The p r e s e n t s t u d y h a s e x p a t i a t e d o n l y on
c e r t a i n p e r t i n e n t a s p e c t s of t h e i n t e l l e c t u a l s c e n e of S a u s s u r e ' s f o r m a t i v e
years, i n p a r t i c u l a r those concerning sociolo~ /'
g yand p o l i t i c a l economy. /'

Other probably n o t l e s s i m p o r t a n t components of t h e paradigm, philosophy

and psychology, have been t r e a t e d o n l y i n p a s s i n g ; we r e g r e t t h a t t h e
r e s e a r c h needed t o e x p l o r e and a s s e s s t h e main t r e n d s i n t h e s e a r e a s would
exceed t h e scope of t h e p r e s e n t i n v e s t i g a t i o n . We have a t l e a s t p o i n t e d
t o a number of p u b l i c a t i o n s c o n c e r n i n g philosophy and psychology ( c f .
1.2.1), t r e a t e d some a s p e c t s of v a r i o u s p s y c h o l o g i c a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s of
l i n g u i s t i c phenomena i n t h e work of H. P a u l and h i s acknowledged pre-
d e c e s s o r s (1.3.2.2) a s w e l l a s i n t h e t h e o r e t i c a l argument b o t h of Baudouin
d e Courtenay and Kruszewski (1.3.3.1-3), and have a l s o a t t e m p t e d t o t r a c e
Humboldtian language philosophy i n t h e work of G. von d e r Gabelentz (1.3.4.1)
and Finck (1.3.4.2) i n o r d e r t o f i n d o u t whether some of ~ u m b o l d t ' s i d e a s
were absorbed by S a u s s u r e . We have n o t t a k e n up Jakobson's (1965: 22)
s u g g e s t i o n t h a t S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r y of t h e l i n g u i s t i c s i g n might have b e e n
i n f l u e n c e d by H e i n r i c h Gomperz 's (1873-1942) WeZtanschauungsZehre (lgO6-08),
4
i n p a r t i c u l a r by t h e t h e o r y of s i g n s o u t l i n e d i n t h e second volume.
T h i s q u e s t i o n w i l l b e d e a l t w i t h i n a l a t e r c h a p t e r ( s . 2.2.3.1cwhen
t h e o r i g i n and -development of S a u s s u r e ' s concept of t h e l a n g u a g e s i g n i s
discussed. S i m i l a r l y , t h e p o s s i b l e i n f l u e n c e of Anton Marty 's (1847-1914)
Untersuchungen z w GrundZegung der aZZgemeinen Grammatik und Sprachphilo-
sophie on S a u s s u r e ' s l i n g u i s t i c thought h a s n o t been r e f e r r e d t o . As
De Mauro (1968: 351) d e m o n s t r a t e s , t h i s volume of a l m o s t 800 pages which
appeared i n H a l l e i n 1908 c o n t a i n e d a number of i d e a s which might s u g g e s t
s i m i l a r i t i e s between M a r t y ' s d i s t i n c t i o n between a g e n e r a l d e s c r i p t i v e
and a g e n e t i c approach t o language a n a l y s i s , t h e primacy of form i n l a n -
guage and o t h e r a s p e c t s , and t h o s e proposed i n t h e Cows. We b e l i e v e
t h a t i t i s n o t s o much t h e q u e s t i o n of influence which i s r e l e v a n t h e r e -
t h e r e i s no i n d i c a t i o n t h a t S a u s s u r e knew t h i s work by Marty - but the
f a c t t h a t M a r t y ' s Untersuchungen c o n s t i t u t e a good example of what was
' i n t h e a i r ' a t t h e b e g i n n i n g of t h i s c e n t u r y when S a u s s u r e s e t o u t t o
l e c t u r e on g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y . A s f a r a s t h e work i n t h e f i e l d
of psychology of language c a r r i e d o u t d u r i n g t h e l a s t decades of t h e
1 9 t h c e n t u r y i s concerned, a h o s t of p u b l i c a t i o n s c o u l d b e l i s t e d t o
i l l u s t r a t e t h e importance of b i b l i o g r a p h i c a l d a t a t o u n d e r s c o r e o u r a r g u -
5
ment; i t s u f f i c e s t o r e l a t e a few examples. I n t h e c h a p t e r on H. P a u l
(1.3.2.2) D i t t r i c h ' s Grundziige der Psychologie of 1903 h a s been r e f e r r e d
t o a t some l e n g t h ; F r i t z Mauthner's (1849-1923) voluminous Beitrzge zu
einer K r i t i k der Sprache c o u l d b e c i t e d a s a n o t h e r example of t h e ' s t a t e
6
of t h e a r t ' a t t h e b e g i n n i n g of t h i s c e n t u r y . However, much more r e -
v e a l i n g a p p e a r s t o b e a s t a t e m e n t which can b e found i n William James '
(1842-1910) Principles of Psychology which appeared i n 1890 and r a n
through s e v e r a l r e - e d i t i o n s d u r i n g t h e a u t h o r ' s (and S a u s s u r e ' s ) l i f e -
time. Out of c l o s e t o 1,400 pages devoted t o a l l p o s s i b l e a s p e c t s of
psychology ( a p p e r c e r p t i o n , a s s o c i a t i o n , c o g n i t i o n , e t c . ) o n l y two-and-
a - h a l f pages ( s i c ! ) d e a l w i t h language "as human f u n c t i o n . " However t h e
f i r s t a f f i r m a t i o n of h i s r e g a r d i n g t h e n a t u r e of language i s q u i t e s i g n i -
ficant: "Language i s a system of signs, d i f f e r e n t from t h e t h i n g s s i g n i -
f i e d , b u t a b l e t o s u g g e s t them."'/ I n t h e subsequent paragraph James d i s -
c u s s e s t h e d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n man and animal w i t h r e s p e c t t o s i g n s . He
p o i n t s o u t t h a t animals t o o h a v e a number of s i g n s t o e x p r e s s c e r t a i n
f e e l i n g s ; a dog, f o r example, may l e a r n a number of s i g n s from h i s m a s t e r .
But t h e r e i s n o t h i n g i n t h e animal kingdom comparable t o what James c a l l s
t h e d e l i b e r a t e i n t e n t i o n of man " t o a p p l y a s i g n t o e v e r y t h i n g " a d d i n g
t h a t t h e " l i n g u i s t i c impulse i s w i t h him g e n e r a l i z e d and s y s t e m a t i c . "
James f u r t h e r p o i n t s o u t t h a t man f e e l s i n h i m s e l f a d r i v e t o name t h i n g s ,
t h e a b s e n c e of a s i g n i r r i t a t i n g him t o t h e e x t e n t t h a t "he ends by i n -
v e n t i n g it", and concludes: "This general purpose c o n s t i t u t e s , I take it,
the pecularity of hwnan speech, and explains i t s prodigious development. 1r8
Here, i n t h e s e o b s e r v a t i o n s of ~ a m e s t' h e r e i s s u r e l y a n i n t e r e s t i n g a n t i -
c i p a t i o n of " ~ a u s s u r e a n " i d e a s c o n c e r n i n g t h e n a t u r e of t h e language
s i g n and t h e unique c h a r a c t e r of human s p e e c h .
A s a t h i r d p o i n t i n o u r argument we wished t o d e m o n s t r a t e t h a t
e x t r a - l i n g u i s t i c i n f l u e n c e s on S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r y of language e x i s t o r
t h a t a t l e a s t p a r a l l e l s and s i m i l a r i t i e s can b e t r a c e d between i d e a s
expounded i n t h e Corns and t h o s e found i n g e n e r a l o u t l i n e s of s o c i o l o g y ,
p o l i t i c a l economy, and o t h e r f i k l d s of i n v e s t i g a t i o n . W e have followed,
i n a few c a s e s , t h e s u g g e s t i o n s of o t h e r s r e g a r d i n g t h e p o s s i b l e i n f l u e n c e
of Durkheim, Tarde, Walras, and o t h e r s on S a u s s u r e ' s l i n g u i s t i c t h o u g h t .
I n a l l i n s t a n c e s we h a v e r e j e c t e d t h e i d e a of a d i r e c t i n f l u e n c e b u t
t h e impression p r e v a i l s - and w i t h much j u s t i f i c a t i o n , we b e l i e v e - that
S a u s s u r e could n o t have escaped t a k i n g n o t i c e of t h e i d e a s c u r r e n t d u r i n g
h i s lifetime.
The f o u r t h major p o i n t which we were t r y i n g t o make i n t h e f i r s t
p a r t of t h i s i n q u i r y i s probably t h e most important p a r t of our argument.
Following a number of s u g g e s t i o n s made en passant i n t h e h i s t o r i e s of
l i n g u i s t i c s a v a i l a b l e t o t h e p r e s e n t day (which a r e g e n e r a l l y more c o n t e n t
t o r e l a t e a fable convenue t h a n t o c a r r y o u t i n d i v i d u a l r e s e a r c h i n t h e
terra incognita of primary s o u r c e s ) and, what i s more i m p o r t a n t , convinced
of t h e d e s i r a b i l i t y t o d e a l w i t h what C o s e r i u (1967b:lOO) termed t h e
I1
r a p p o r t s avec l a l i n g u i s t i q u e u l t & i e u r e l ' , we have gone d i r e c t l y ad
fontes i n o r d e r t o e s t a b l i s h what we b e l i e v e t o b e t h e p r i n c i p a l l i n -
g u i s t i c s o u r c e s of S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r e t i c a l impetus: t h e work of Whitney
and, o f t e n ex m g a t i v o , H. P a u l ' s Prinzipien, t h e w r i t i n g s of Baudouin
d e Courtenay and Kruszewski (though probably much l e s s t h a n h a s r e c e n t l y
been s u g g e s t e d ) , and c e r t a i n l y a l s o t h e work of o t h e r contemporary l i n -
g u i s t s such a s f o r i n s t a n c e S i e v e r s and (perhaps w i t h more r e s e r v e )
G. von d e r Gabelentz.
We have n o t d i s c u s s e d t h e q u e s t i o n of i n f l u e n c e s from a number of
o t h e r prominent l i n g u i s t s of t h e l a t e 1 9 t h c e n t u r y which have a l s o been
s u g g e s t e d b e c a u s e we do n o t t h i n k them t o b e of comparable importance.
Thus G. Mounin b e l i e v e d t h a t t h e r61e of S a u s s u r e ' s m a s t e r i n P a r i s ,
Michel ~ r 6 a l(1832-1915), t h e well-known a u t h o r of t h e Essai de szmantique
( P a r i s 189 7), h a s g e n e r a l l y been u n d e r e s t i m a t e d . B. C o l l i n d e r (1962:
6, 13; 1968: 183-5, 189, 196-7, 203-5) c l a i m s t h a t Adolf Noreen (1854-
1925) i n f l u e n c e d S a u s s u r e , - and t h i s h a s t o b e c o n s i d e r e d i n comparison
w i t h Malmberg's o b s e r v a t i o n (1964:35) that his ~ & ~t p r z k (Lund 1903-23)
remained e s s e n t i a l l y unknown o u t s i d e Sweden - , and D e Mauro (1968:356-60)
who devoted a p a r t i c u l a r appendix t o t h i s q u e s t i o n w i t h o u t however coming
up w i t h a convincing argument t o s u b s t a n t i a t e C o l l i n d e r ' s c o n t e n t i o n .
S i m i l a r l y J o s t W i n t e l e r ' s Kerenzer Mundart of 1876 h a s f r e q u e n t l y b e e n
r e f e r r e d t o i n t h e h i s t o r y of l i n g u i s t i c s (cf . Trubeckoj , 1933: 288;
Malmberg, 1964: 34; Lepschy, 1970: 59f .) a s p r e c u r s o r of S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r y
of t h e phoneme; S a u s s u r e owned a copy of t h i s s t u d y ( c f . De Mauro, 1968:
361) and t h e r e i s every r e a s o n t o b e l i e v e t h a t h e had a l r e a d y f a m i l i a r i z e d
h i m s e l f w i t h i t s c o n t e n t s d u r i n g h i s s t a y i n L e i p z i g (1876-78). However,
t h e r e i s no i n d i c a t i o n i n S a u s s u r e ' s work t h a t W i n t e l e r ' s f i n d i n g s were
of a r e v e a l i n g n a t u r e comparable t o what they had been t o Brugmann and
Osthof f i n t h e i r l i n g u i s t i c argument i n t h e MorphoZogische Untersuchungen
of 1878.
One wonders, and t h i s i s an i n s t a n c e of t h e problem one f a c e s i n
t r y i n g t o a s s e s s the contemporary i n f l u e n c e s on S a u s s u r e , whether S a u s s u r e
was f a m i l i a r w i t h t h e work of a Swedish l i n g u i s t who was almost completely
ignored i n h i s home c o u n t r y ( c f . Malmberg, 1968:53) and who h a s b e e n
t o t a l l y ignored i n t h e h i s t o r y of l i n g u i s t i c s u n t i l today: C a r l S v e d e l i u s .
I n 1891 ( s i x y e a r s b e f o r e t h e a p p e a r a n c e of B r & a l l s Essai de sgmantique!)
t h i s young s c h o l a r p u b l i s h e d a n Etude sur la sgmantique of some f i f t y
pages, and i n 1897 h i s d o c t o r a l t h e s i s appeared which r e c e i v e d a n i n s i g h t f u l
review by t h e t h e n champion of Romance l i n g u i s t s Wilhelm Meyer-Liibke
(1861-1936). According t o Meyer-Liibke t h e L1anaZyse du Zangage appziquge
h Za langue franGaisel0 c o n s t i t u t e s a m e t h o d o l o g i c a l l y sound p i e c e of
work i n which t h e a u t h o r a t t e m p t e d t o develop a k i n d of 'Algebra d e r
Grammatik', a s y s t e m a t i c approach t o contemporary French s y n t a x , "ohne
11
j e d e Riicksicht auf d i e h i s t o r i s c h e Entwicklung".
We a r e convinced t h a t anyone working i n t h e a r e a of l i n g u i s t i c
p r o d u c t i o n i n Western and C e n t r a l Europe between 1870 and 1910 w i l l i n -
e v i t a b l y f i n d a number of f u r t h e r " s t r i k i n g " p a r a l l e l s and a p p a r e n t a n t i -
c i p a t o r y remarks r e l a t i n g t o i d e a s e x p r e s s e d i n t h e Cows. I. Iordan
and J . Orr f o r i n s t a n c e p o i n t t o t h e w r i t i n g s of V i c t o r Henry (1850-1907),
i n p a r t i c u l a r h i s Antinomies Zinquistiques ( P a r i s 1896), l2 and Arssne
Darmesteter (1846-88)13 - i n a d d i t i o n t o Br6al - s t a t i n g t h a t one might
b e tempted t o s p e a k of S a u s s u r e a s t h e i r d e b t o r s i n c e a l l of t h e s e were
h i s seniors. "But, t h e i r argument i s t h a t , a s a. s i m i l a r k i n s h i p i s t o
b e d e t e c t e d between c e r t a i n of S a u s s u r e ' s d o c t r i n e s and t h e t e a c h i n g s
of t h e neo-grammarians, i t i s more a p p r o p r i a t e t o c o n s i d e r him a s h a v i n g
focused a number of i d e a s which, were t a k i n g shape i n t h e l i n g u i s t i c w o r l d ,
and which were, i n a s e n s e , common p r o p e r t y . " And t h e s e two s c h o l a r s
c o n t i n u e t h e i r b o l d and p e r c e p t i v e argument by s a y i n g t h a t S a u s s u r e ' s
11
o r i g i n a l i t y , which i s i n d i s p u t a b l e , would t h u s c o n s i s t i n h a v i n g evolved
a complete and c o h e r e n t system, a l l h i s own, i r r e s p e c t i v e of t h e s o u r c e
of any p a r t i c u l a r i n g r e d i e n t . " ( I o r d a n I O r r , 1937[1970]:294, n . 1 ) .
The a p t n e s s of such a summary s t a t e m e n t i s i n t h i s c o n t e x t s i n g u l a r l y
appropriate.
 FOOTNOTES - 1.4

According t o De Mauro (1968:361-2) o u t of a number of 465 i t e m s

b e l o n g i n g t o FdS's l i b r a r y which were handed o v e r by J a c q u e s and Raymond
d e S a u s s u r e i n 1921 t o t h e Geneva P u b l i c L i b r a r y only a b o u t a dozen were
related t o linguistic studies.

2nd r e v . ed. (Chicago: Chicago Univ. P r e s s , 1 9 7 0 ) , e n l a r g e d by

a " P o s t s c r i p t - 1969", pp. 174-210, and minor t e x t u a l emendations.

Cf. t h e s t u d y p r e p a r e d by Eugene G a r f i e l d and o t h e r s , The Use of

Citation Data i n Writing the History of Science ( P h i l a d e l p h i a , Pa.: I n s t .
f o r S c i e n t i f i c I n f o r m a t i o n , I n c . , Dec. 31, 1964), f o r a r e c e n t a t t e m p t
a t making u s e of t h e computer f o r t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t of a b i b l i o g r a p h i c a l
c i t a t i o n network which p e r m i t s e l u c i d a t i o n of c h r o n o l o g i c a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s
between s c i e n t i f i c d i s c o v e r i e s . It i s d o u b t f u l , however, t h a t comparable
e x a c t n e s s can b e achieved i n t r a c i n g i d e a s w i t h i n v a r i o u s b r a n c h e s of
t h e human s c i e n c e s , i n p a r t i c u l a r i n philosophy and l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y .

NooZogie: EinZeitung und Semasiologie (Jena: E . D i e d e r i c h , 1908).

We may simply r e f e r t o t h e s e c t i o n 11. 3. (b) , " W r i t i n g s i n t h e

Domain of Philosophy and Psychology", i n our forthcoming Bibliographia
Saussmeana 1870-1970 which c o n t a i n s some one hundred t i t l e s most of
which appeared d u r i n g t h e p e r i o d 1870-1910.
6
S. esp. v o l . I, Zur Sprache und Psychologie (Leipzig: F. Meiner,
1901) ; 3rd r e v . ed. , ibid., 1923.
Principles of PsychoZogy, (New York: H . H o l t & Co.), v o l . 11, p.
356.
8
Loc. c i t . ; i t a l i c s and b o l d f a c e i n t h e o r i g i n a l .
9
Cf. h i s "Une i l l u s i o n d ' o p t i q u e en h i s t o i r e d e l a l i n g u i s t i q u e " ,
T I L 4: 7-13 (1959).

lo Uppsala: Almquist & V i k s e l l , 1897, 178 pp.

l1 Cf. LGRP 20, c o l l . 49-52 (1899) ; s . e s p . c o l l . 4 9 f . ~ e ~ e r - ~ G b k e

develops a t t h e same time some of h i s own i d e a s which a r e h a r d l y l e s s
informative. I n t h e f i r s t paragraph of h i s review, M.-L. s p e a k s f i v e
t i m e s of stern" i n language and t h e o r y of language. A f t e r h a v i n g asked
whether t h e l i n g u i s t i s n o t o v e r - i n c l i n e d t o i n f e r a system i n t o l i n g u i s t i c
phenomea where i t i s n o t j u s t i f Y e d h e s t a t e s : "Zumaldie b i o l o g i s c h e
B e t r a c h t u n g g e r a d e d e r Sprache z e i g t uns, d a s s ~ & v - r aP E T ; j e w e i t e r i n
h o r i z o n t a l e r o d e r i n v e r t i k a l e r Richtung d e r B l i c k s i c h a u s d e h n t , um s o
m a n n i g f a l t i g e r e Vorgznge s t e l l e n s i c h uns d a r , um s o weniger l e i c h t w i r d
e s s e i n , e i n a l l e [ i . e . l i n g u i s t i c p r o c e s s ] umfassendes System zu e r r i c h -
ten, .... ...
[And f u r t h e r : ] ; man w i r d dann a b e r zungchst g u t t h u n ,
e i z e l n e Sprachen und Sprachperioden f c r s i c h zu s t u d i e r e n , ohne damit
Anspruch auf A l l g e m e i n g c l t i g k e i t d e r d a b e i gefundenen Formeln zu machen."
( c o l l . 49; our i t a l i c s ) . We a r e i n c l i n e d t o b e l i e v e t h a t t h i s s t a t e m e n t
r e v e a l s Meyer-Liibke's awareness of t h e n e c e s s a r y d i s c r i m i n a t i o n between
synchrony and diachrony.

l2 Cf. S c h u c h a r d t ' s review of t h i s s t u d y of some 80 pages i n LGRP

1 8 , c o l l . 238-47 (189 7 ) .

l3 S i n c e 1ordan/Orr (1937:294, n.1) do n o t mention any p a r t i c u l a r

work by D a r m e s t e t e r ( i n f a c t , t h e y do n o t even seem aware of t h e f a c t
t h a t ~ r s s n ehad a b r o t h e r , James (1849-94), who a l s o was a l i n g u i s t
a t P a r i s ) ; we r e f e r t o nos. 1582-6 i n o u r BibZiographia Saussureana f o r
a s e l e c t l i s t of h i s w r i t i n g s .
2.0 THE EVOLUTION OF SAUSSUREAN P R I N C I P L E S AND T H E I R RELEVANCE TO
CONTEMPORARY THEORIES OF LANGUAGE

Es wdre eine Geschichte der Auswirkung

Saussures i n der Sprachwissenschaf t des
20. Jahrhunderts zu schreiben; denn man
kljnnte die EntwickZung dieser DiszipZin
sehr wohZ i n eine Periode vor und i n eine
Periode nach Savssure enteiZen, so weit-
reichend und tiefgehend war d i e Wirkung
seiner Lehre.
Hans Arens (1969 :573)

... Saussure ' s posthumous Cours (1916)

i n v i t e s and r i c h l y deserves assessment on
the strength of i t s spzendors and accom-
p lishments, i t s i n s tantaneous impact,
especiaZZy outside Central Europe ...
Yakov M a l k i e l i n 1969 ( R P ~22: 537)

Le structuraZisme, Zoin d %re un mouve-

ment homogane, se prgsente sous des formes
diverses, qu 'on c i t e Za phonozogie de 9 u -
betzkoy, Za gZossdmatique de HjeZmsZev, Zes
conceptions de KwryZmicz ou Za g r m a i r e
q6n6rative de Ch.omsky. Etant donn6 que
peut-Ztre La seuZe chose qui unisse Zes
structuraZis t e s e s t qui 'iZs se rBcZament
tous, duns une mesure plus ou moins grande,
de Saussure come de Zeur maCtre ou t o u t
au moins pr6curseur, Ze mieux sera de con-
sacrer Ze pr6sent a r t i c l e au Cours d e l i n -
g u i s t i q u e g g n g r a l e qui es t probab Zement
Z 'ouurage Zinguis tique Ze pZus souvent c i t &
parnri tous c e m qui ont paru au vingtiame
siBcle.
 I n t h e general i n t r o d u c t i o n t o our study o u t l i n i n g t h e p r i n c i p l e s
and g o a l s of t h e p r e s e n t i n q u i 2 y u s e h a s been made of a c e r t a i n s e t of
n o t i o n s f i r s t p u t forward by T. S . Kuhn i n h i s now famous Structure of
S c i e n t i f i c RevoZutions, i n p a r t i c u l a r t h e concept of 'paradigm' ( c f .
Kuhn, 1970:10ff., 23ff., 4 3 f f . , and e l s e w h e r e ) . M. Masterman h a s r e c e n t l y
s u b j e c t e d Kuhn's book t o c l o s e s c r u t i n y , and a c c o r d i n g t o h e r f i n d i n g s
t h e a u t h o r used t h e term i n no l e s s t h a n twenty-one d i f f e r e n t s e n s e s . Z
While we b e l i e v e t h a t aster man's f i n d i n g s a r e somewhat e x a g g e r a t e d and
a r e a t t i m e s t h e r e s u l t of a n o v e r - i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of c e r t a i n p a s s a g e s
i n Kuhn o r even mere m i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g on h e r p a r t , t h e f a c t remains
t h a t Kuhn d i d n o t employ t h e term 'paradigm' consistently. Kuhn (1970:
181) l a t e r a d m i t t e d t o " s t y l i s t i c i n c o n s i s t e n c i e s " a t l e a s t where h i s
earlier u s e of 'paradigm' i s concerned b u t emphasized t h a t "two v e r y
d i f f e r e n t usages of t h e t e r m would remain, and . . . require separation''
(Kuhn, 1970:182). W e must admit t o f a i l u r e t o s e e t h e s u b t l e d i f f e r e n c e
between 1 ) p a r a d i g m s a s t h e c o n s t e l l a t i o n of group commitments, i . e .
t h e " d i s c i p l i n a r y m a t r i x " by which Kuhn means what c o n s t i t u t e s " t h e common
p o s s e s s i o n of t h e p r a c t i t i o n e r s of a p a r t i c u l a r d i s c i p l i n e " (p. 1 8 2 ) , and
2) paradigms a s s h a r e d examples, i . e . t h e o r i e s and r u l e s t o which each
member of a g i v e n d i s c i p l i n e h a s been i n i t i a t e d i n t h e c o u r s e of h i s
a p p r e n t i c e s h i p (pp. l 8 7 f f .) . However, we do n o t t h i n k t h a t Kuhn's l a t e s t
s u g g e s t i o n s a r e v e r y h e l p f u l f o r t h e p r e s e n t purpose, e x c e p t f o r h i s
i n s i s t e n c e on c h a r a c t e r i z i n g a g i v e n paradigm a s a g e n e r a l e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l
viewpoint ( c f . Kuhn, 19 70: 120) and a s a s o c i a l phenomenon ( s . p . 184) .
For our purpose w e would l i k e t o d i s t i n g u i s h between t h e f o l l o w i n g
two k i n d s of paradigms: f i r s t l y , and t h i s i s i n g e n e r a l agreement w i t h
Kuhn, t h e i n t e l l e c t u a l paradigm of a g i v e n c u l t u r a l and s o c i a l group a t
a g i v e n p e r i o d which i s s h a r e d o r h a s b e e n absorbed by i t s i n d i v i d u a l
members and, s e c o n d l y , t h e (and a g a i n i n t h e Kuhnian s e n s e ) " r e v o l u t i o n a r y "
a c t of s e t t i n g up t h e framework f o r t h e development of a new paradigm
t o r e p l a c e t h e o l d one. I n t h i s c o n t e x t we a g r e e w i t h t h e o b s e r v a t i o n s
of John Watkins (which a r e on many o t h e r p o i n t s q u i t e m i s l e a d i n g ) on
Kuhn's i d e a s , namely t h a t i t t a k e s y e a r s " t o develop a p o t e n t i a l new
paradigm t o t h e p o i n t where if may c h a l l e n g e a n e n t r e n c h e d paradigm"
and t h a t l ' h e r e t i c a l t h i n k i n g must h a v e b e e n going on f o r a l o n g t i m e
b e f o r e paradigm-change can occuk. 113 S a u s s u r e , i n o u r c a s e , c a n b e s a i d
t o h a v e s h a r e d t h e epistemology of t h e l a t e n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y , b u t i t
w a s o u t of h i s growing d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n and h i s f e e l i n g f o r t h e incommen-
s u r a b i l i t y of t h e t o o l s i t o f f e r e d f o r t h e s o l u t i o n of t h e problems h e
encountered t h a t S a u s s u r e developed s t e p by s t e p h i s t h e o r y of how l a n g u a g e
s h o u l d b e t r e a t e d , t h e r e s u l t of which h a s f r e q u e n t l y been termed a
'Copernican r e v o l u t i o n ' . 4

S a u s s u r e , a s we w i l l document i n t h e subsequent d i s c u s s i o n , d i d n o t
immediately p u t forward a f u l l y - f l e d g e d t h e o r y which c o u l d s o l v e , w i t h o u t
m o d i f i c a t i o n and improvements, a l l t h e problems p r e v i o u s methods had b e e n
i n c a p a b l e of h a n d l i n g b u t i n v i t e d l a t e r g e n e r a t i o n s of s c h o l a r s t o engage
i n what Kuhn terms "mopping-up o p e r a t i o n s 1 ' ( c f . Kuhn, 1970:24). The
question r a i s e d i n t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n (0.0), a s t o whether Chomsky h a s
i n f a c t proposed a new paradigm ( t o r e p l a c e t h e Saussurean one) o r whether
h i s work c o n s t i t u e s t h e phenomenon of a l a t e mopping-up p h a s e of t h e one
i n i t i a t e d by t h e Corns, must remain p a r t l y unanswered and p e r h a p s p r e s e n t s
a problem t o b e d i s c u s s e d a t a l a t e r s t a g e i n t h e development of normal
(linguistic) science.
2.1 The Compilation o f the Cows and the Problems of Interpretation

De Saussure hat seine Lehre vorgetragen

i n seinen Genfer VorZesungen s e i t 1906;
e r s t nach seinem Tode sind s i e 2916 aZs
'Vours de Zinguistique g&&aZe " von s e i -
nen SchiiZern BaZZy und Sechehaye nach
ihren [ s i c] VorZesungsnachschriften ver-
BffintZicht worden. Auf Grund dieses
Entstehens i s t dieses grundzegende Werk
der modernen Linguistik z . 9. uneinheit-
Zich und hat deshaZb auch irmner wieder
AnZass zu verschiedenartigen Interpreta-
tionen und h e f t i g e n Diskussionen gegeben.

Gerhard H e l b i g (19 70 :33)

M. J o o s ' acknowledgement of o v e r a decade ago t h a t a l m o s t one h a l f

o f t h e " ~ l o o m f i e l d i a n " l i n g u i s t s of t h e f o r t i e s and f i f t i e s i n North
America had n o t r e a d t h e Cours b u t had a c q u i r e d t h e i r i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t
i t s c o n t e n t s second-hand a p p e a r s t o a p p l y t o many o t h e r l i n g u i s t s through-
o u t t h e Western World p a s t and p r e s e n t . I n d i c a t i v e of t h i s r e s u l t a n t
m i s i n f o r m a t i o n i s t h a t t h e r e h a v e been l i n g u i s t s who s e t t h e d a t e of t h e
f i r s t e d i t i o n of t h e Cours as 1915 i n s t e a d of 1 9 1 6 , ~ o r t h o s e who s t i l l
m a i n t a i n t h a t i t appeared i n Geneva i n s t e a d of Lausanne and P a r i s , ' but
i t i s more r e a d i l y a p p a r e n t i n t h o s e c a s e s i n which t h e a u t h o r m a i n t a i n s
t h a t t h e Cours was b a s e d on t h e c o m p i l e r s ' own n o t e s t a k e n d u r i n g S a u s s u r e ' s
l e c t u r e s on g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s i n c o n t r a s t t o t h e a f f i r m a t i o n s of B a l l y
and S a u s s u r e h i m s e l f ( c f . CLG, 8 ) .
7

These o b s e r v a t i o n s appear a t f i r s t s i g h t t o amount t o n o t h i n g b u t

p e t t y p e d a n t r y b u t a r e i n f a c t of some s i g n i f i c a n c e f o r t h e h i s t o r y of
t h e Cours i t s e l f . F i r s t l y , i t i s c o n c e i v a b l e t h a t B a l l y and Sechehaye
may h a v e wished t o p u b l i s h t h e posthumous work of t h e i r r e v e r e d m a s t e r
i n 1916, e x a c t l y one hundred y e a r s a f t e r t h e appearance of Bopp's Com-
pendium which h a s been r e g a r d e d by t h e g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c p u b l i c a s marking
t h e b e g i n n i n g of l i n g u i s t i c s c i e n c e i n o r d e r t o announce a new paradigm
of thought .8 I n a d d i t i o n , t h e wrong d a t e of p u b l i c a t i o n may w e l l b e t a k e n a s
i n d i c a t i v e of t h e small r e s p o n s e t h e f i r s t e d i t i o n enjoyed.' J. Vachek
(1966:18) r e p o r t s t h a t i t w a s o b l y by t h e second e d i t i o n of t h e Cows
t h a t members of t h e Prague School were i n f l u e n c e d , and s i m i l a r o b s e r v a t i o n s
c o u l d b e made w i t h r e g a r d t o o t h e r groups n o t t o s p e a k of t h e delayed
r e c e p t i o n of S a u s s u r e i n Germany where s c h o l a r s had b e e n t o o c o n f i d e n t
about t h e i r achievements i n t h e 1 9 t h c e n t u r y t o abandon i m p o r t a n t a s p e c t s
of t h e neogramrnarian d o c t r i n e .
Secondly, i t i s perhaps s i g n i f i c a n t and n o t w i t h o u t some i r o n y a t
l e a s t t h a t t h e Cows was n e v e r p r i n t e d i n Geneva, S a u s s u r e ' s home-town,
where h i s L e i p z i g d i s s e r t a t i o n (1881) and l a t e r on t h e RecueiZ (1922) ap-
peared i n which t h e b u l k of S a u s s u r e ' s p u b l i s h e d work had b e e n c o l l e c t e d .
The t h i r d p o i n t i s , of c o u r s e , t h e most i m p o r t a n t one. Both C h a r l e s
B a l l y (1865-1947) and A l b e r t Sechehaye (1870-1946) were s c h o l a r s who had
a l r e a d y d i s t i n g u i s h e d themselves through a number of publications1o when
t h e y set o u t t o compile t h e Cows w i t h t h e h e l p of e x t e n s i v e n o t e s t a k e n
by s t u d e n t s and some of S a u s s u r e ' s own manuscripts.'' B a l l y and Sechehaye
were a t t h e t i m e b o t h l e c t u r e r s a t t h e U n i v e r s i t y , and, a s t h e y r e p o r t
i n t h e p r e f a c e t o t h e Cows, w e r e u n a b l e t o a t t e n d S a u s s u r e ' s l e c t u r e s
on g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s . The consequences of t h i s s i m p l e f a c t s h o u l d n o t
b e u n d e r e s t i m a t e d a s we hope t o d e m o n s t r a t e i n t h e subsequent p a r a g r a p h s .
I n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h h i s c o n t r a c t of December 8, 1906, S a u s s u r e was
r e q u i r e d t o t e a c h a c o u r s e on g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s and t h e h i s t o r y and
comparison of t h e Indo-European languages (SM, 3 4 ) , a t a s k which h e a c c e p t e d
reluctantly. S a u s s u r e thought i t t o b e t o o demanding i n terms of time
( h e had t o t e a c h a number of o t h e r c o u r s e s ) and m e n t a l e f f o r t ( h e f e l t
h e could n e v e r f i n d s a t i s f a c t o r y answers t o t h e many q u e s t i o n s s u r r o u n d i n g
t h e f o u n d a t i o n of a g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y ) . I n a d d i t i o n , Saussure,
whose p e d a g o g i c a l q u a l i f i c a t i o n s have f r e q u e n t l y been r e f e r r e d t o w i t h
p r a i s e by h i s most eminent p u p i l s ( e . g . B a l l y and M e i l l e t ) , a d m i t t e d a s
l a t e a s May 6, 1911, i n an i n t e r v i e w w i t h Leopold G a u t i e r , t h a t h e found
h i m s e l f i n a dilemma: whether t o expound t h e problem i n i t s e n t i r e
complexity and admit h i s d o u b t s o r whether t o s i m p l i f y t h e m a t t e r making
i t more e a s y f o r t h e (more o r l e s s u n i n i t i a t e d ) s t u d e n t t o u n d e r s t a n d
( c f . SM, 30). Saussure, i t seems, f r e q u e n t l y choose a v i a media though
h e was always concerned w i t h p r e s e n t i n g h i s i d e a s i n a manner which
permitted h i s s t u d e n t s t o folldw. Thus, i n h i s f i r s t c o u r s e (January 1 6 , -
J u l y 3 r d , 1907), S a u s s u r e i n t r o d u c e d v e r y few new terms and d e a l t a l m o s t
e x c l u s i v e l y w i t h d i a c h r o n i c l i n g u i s t i c s , t h e p r i n c i p l e s of which were more
o r less known t o h i s s t u d e n t s . 1 2 By c o n t r a s t h e began h i s second c o u r s e
(November 1908 - J u n e 24, 1909) w i t h a d i s c u s s i o n of t h e g e n e r a l problems
of language s t u d y . I n f a c t h i s i n t r o d u c t i o n t o t h e s e problems was s u r -
p r i s i n g l y b o l d and e x p l i c i t b u t w a s n o t completed b e f o r e J a n u a r y 21, 1909;
however, t h e t e x t of t h i s f i r s t c o h e r e n t o u t l i n e of g e n e r a l p r i n c i p l e s
w a s n o t p u b l i s h e d u n t i l 1957 when Godel e d i t e d i t w i t h t h e h e l p of e x t e n s i v e
n o t e s t a k e n by s t u d e n t s of S a u s s u r e ( c f . CFS 15:6-103). The remainder of
t h e c o u r s e was a g a i n mainly concerned w i t h a n "apercu d e l a l i n g u i s t i q u e
indo-europ6enne cornme i n t r o d u c t i o n 2 l a l i n g u i s t i q u e g 6 n g r a l e " which con-
s t i t u t e d a b o u t t h r e e - q u a r t e r s of t h e l e c t u r e s ( c f . SM, 35; s. a l s o pp. 66-75).
F i n a l l y , t h e t h i r d c o u r s e (October 28, 1910 - J u l y 4, 1911) was
a g a i n mainly concerned w i t h d i a c h r o n i c a s p e c t s of language s t u d y , i n c l u d i n g
l i n g u i s t i c geography, t h e r e l a t i o n between w r i t i n g and p h o n e t i c r e p r e s e n -
t a t i o n , and t h e arrangement of t h e main language f a m i l i e s . Saussure
d i v i d e d h i s c o u r s e i n t o two main p a r t s ; f o l l o w i n g h i s e x t e n s i v e t r e a t m e n t
of "Les langues", h e f i n a l l y d e a l t w i t h "La langue" ( c f . SM, 77-92 f o r
a n a n a l y s i s ) , d e v o t i n g h a r d l y more t h a n h a l f a dozen h o u r s t o problems
13
of s t a t i c l i n g u i s t i c s ( c f . SM, 86-92).
B a l l y and Sechehaye r e p o r t i n t h e p r e f a c e t o t h e f i r s t e d i t i o n of
t h e Cours t h a t i n i t i a l l y t h e y had hoped t o f i n d among S a u s s u r e ' s p a p e r s
s u f f i c i e n t m a t e r i a l t o c o n s t r u c t an o u t l i n e of h i s p r i n c i p l e s and methods
of l i n g u i s t i c a n a l y s i s . However, s i n c e S a u s s u r e had n o t p r e s e r v e d most
of h i s l e c t u r e n o t e s , t h e e d i t o r s were o b l i g e d t o a t t e m p t t h e i r c o m p i l a t i o n
mainly w i t h t h e h e l p of n o t e s t a k e n by s t u d e n t s . About h a l f a dozen
s t u d e n t s had r e g u l a r l y a t t e n d e d S a u s s u r e ' s l e c t u r e s on g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s ,
and t h e e d i t o r s r e c e i v e d n o t e s , a t t i m e s q u i t e complete and f a i t h f u l of
a l l t h r e e courses.14 I n any c a s e , B a l l y and Sechehaye must h a v e f e l t
encouraged by t h e f a i r number of e x t e n s i v e n o t e s t a k e n by t h e s e s t u d e n t s
d u r i n g S a u s s u r e ' s l e c t u r e s and f r e q u e n t l y compared and completed by each
of them t h e r e a f t e r w i t h t h e h e l p of t h e n o t e s t a k e n by t h e o t h e r s , w i t h
t h e r e s u l t t h a t t h e e d i t o r s dedided t o v e n t u r e a s y n t h e s i s of S a u s s u r e ' s
t e a c h i n g s on t h e b a s i s of t h e t h i r d c o u r s e ( c f . CLG, 9 ) .
The e d i t o r s c o l l a t e d t h e l e c t u r e n o t e s of each i n d i v i d u a l c o u r s e
b e f o r e they compiled t h e f i n a l v e r s i o n which i s t h e r e s u l t of v e r y c l o s e
c o l l a b o r a t i o n between t h e two s c h o l a r s t o t h e e x t e n t t h a t i t i s q u i t e
i m p o s s i b l e t o d i s c e r n which of t h e two p r e p a r e d one s e c t i o n o r t h e o t h e r .
Godel (SM, 100) h a s shown t h a t t h e t h i r d c o u r s e was a l s o used as t h e
b a s i s f o r t h e r e - e s t a b l i s h m e n t of t h e I n t r o d u c t i o n (CLG, 13-61), whereas
t h e n o t e s from t h e second c o u r s e , though much more e x p l i c i t , w e r e merely
employed t o complement i t and f i l l i n t h e gaps. l5 Godel h a s a l s o shown
q u i t e c l e a r l y t h a t a number o f new t e c h n i c a l terms and c o n c e p t s w e r e
i n t r o d u c e d by S a u s s u r e f o r t h e f i r s t t i m e i n h i s l a s t c o u r s e ( c f . SM, 1 1 2 ) ;
as a r e s u l t B a l l y and Sechehaye must h a v e f e l t o b l i g e d t o make p a r t i c u l a r
u s e of t h e c o n t e n t s of t h e s e l e c t u r e s t o r e c r e a t e t h e i r m a s t e r ' s o r i g i n a l
views. This p r o c e d u r e , t o g e t h e r w i t h a number of t e x t u a l i n s e r t i o n s f o r
which t h e r e seems t o b e no d i r e c t s o u r c e , 1 6 succeeded i n making t h e Corns
l o o k a t f i r s t s i g h t l i k e a complete book (which i t was n o t ) w i t h o u t
however e l i m i n a t i n g a l l t h e c o n t r a d i c t i o n s .
Godel s u b j e c t e d t h e e d i t o r s ' work t o a c l o s e a n a l y s i s (SM, 95-121)
b e f o r e t r y i n g t o r e - e v a l u a t e S a u s s u r e ' s t e a c h i n g s i n t h e l i g h t of a l l
t h e s t u d e n t s ' n o t e s and S a u s s u r e ' s own m a n u s c r i p t s which h a v e b e e n r e -
covered (SM, 130-251). Not o n l y d i d h e r e - e s t a b l i s h t h e manner i n which
B a l l y and Sechehaye compiled t h e C o w s b u t a l s o t h e m a t e r i a l which was
used and t h e way i t w a s a r r a n g e d . T h i s h a s allowed Godel t o p o i n t o u t
t h a t Sechehaye's i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s of t h e m a t e r i a l had a n i m p o r t a n t impact
on t h e f i n a l wording of t h e t e x t (SM, 9 7 ) , t h a t o l d e r m a n u s c r i p t s of
S a u s s u r e h i m s e l f (SM, 95-6) and n o t e s from o t h e r c o u r s e s were made u s e o f ,
t o t h e e x t e n t t h a t a s e c t i o n on " L i n g u i s t i q u e g60graphique" was sand-
wiched i n between t h e two l i n g u i s t i c s , i . e . t h e s t a t i c o r s y c h r o n i c and
t h e e v o l u t i v e o r d i a c h r o n i c (SM, 9 9 ) . l7 Godel a l s o n o t e s t h a t t h e e d i t o r s ,
w h i l e a v o i d i n g terms n o t used by S a u s s u r e h i m s e l f , s u b s t i t u t e d a c e r t a i n
It
number of e x p r e s s i o n s , e.g. f a c e " (CLG, 99 and 145) f o r ltc$t6",
" s i m u l t a n 6 i t 6 s 1 ' (CLG, 115) f o r "contemporan6it6s", " e s p r i t de clocher"
f o r ' ' f o r c e du c l o c h e r " (CLG, 28'lff., which S a u s s u r e had d e r i v e d from
Whitney; c f . 1 . 3 . 1 ) ; t h e s e cannot b e r e g a r d e d a s f a l s i f y i n g S a u s s u r e ' s
d o c t r i n e b u t a s mainly " r e t o u c h e s d e s t y l e " (SM, 113-4). On t h e o t h e r
hand, i t may w e l l b e asked w h e t h e r i t i s s u f f i c i e n t t o r e g a r d t h e r e p l a c e -
ment of "sens" by " s i g n i f i c a t i o n " (CLG, 159) o r t h e i n s e r t i o n of "modes
(moyens, s y s t s m e s ) d ' e x p r e s s i o n " i n p l a c e of t h e s e m i o l o g i c a l f a c t s of
t h e a r b i t r a i r e i n language (CLG, l o o f f . ) , and t h e e x c e s s i v e u s e of t h e
t e r m " d i s t i n c t " (CLG, 26, 167, and elsewhere) t o t h e same e x t e n t a s a
c o r r e c t i o n of s t y l i s t i c i n f e l i c i t i e s , a s Godel seems t o imply (SM, 113-4).
A s Godel demonstrates (SM, 114-5) t h e e d i t o r s ' i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h e
( a t t i m e s incomplete) m a t e r i a l was n o t always i n conformity w i t h what
S a u s s u r e had i n d e e d s a i d , t h u s l e a d i n g t h e r e a d e r of t h e Cours t o f a l s e
c o n c l u s i o n s r e g a r d i n g t h e n a t u r e of t h e language s i g n , t h e synchrony/
diachrony d i s t i n c t i o n , and o t h e r i s s u e s of importance ( c f . each second
c h a p t e r of t h e s u b s e c t i o n s of t h i s p a r t f o r a d i s c u s s i o n of t h e s e ) .
In a d d i t i o n , Godel g i v e s q u i t e a l o n g l i s t of p a s s a g e s which were added
by t h e e d i t o r s (SM, 115-9; c f . f o o t n o t e 1 6 ) ; a number of f u r t h e r p a s s a g e s
could b e found ( c f . CLG(E) [ p a s s i m ] ) . These a d d i t i o n s i n c l u d e t h e p u z z l i n g
remark r e g a r d i n g t h e system of language a s " n a t u r e l l e m e n t c h a o t i q u e "
(CLG, l 8 3 ) , and t h e famous c o n c l u d i n g s e n t e n c e of t h e Cours (CLG, 317;
18
c f . SM, 1 8 1 ) .
These remarks w i l l p e r h a p s s e r v e t o e x p l a i n some of t h e t r a d i t i o n a l
m i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s of S a u s s u r e t s d o c t r i n e , and indeed draw a t t e n t i o n t o
t h e problems of a p p r e c i a t i o n of h i s o r i g i n a l thought. These d i f f i c u l t i e s
h a v e b e e n a n a l y z e d i n e x t e n s o by Godel (SM, 1 3 0 f f . ) b u t a l s o by Engler
( l 9 5 9 f f .) , and have b e e n i n c o r p o r a t e d by De Mauro i n h i s work on S a u s s u r e
( c f . De Mauro, 1 9 6 8 f f . ) . The c r i t i c a l e d i t i o n of t h e C o w s which Godel
(SM, 98) had c a l l e d f o r a s t h e o n l y r e l i a b l e way of r e s o l v i n g a number
of i n c o n s i s t e n c i e s w i t h i n t h e compiled t e x t h a s been i n t h e hands of t h e
Romance s c h o l a r Rudolf Engler (b. 1930), of Berne U n i v e r s i t y , s i n c e 1958
( c f . CFS 19: 7, n. 4) ; i t s f i r s t volume was completed i n 1968, and t h e
p u b l i c a t i o n of S a u s s u r e t s own m a n u s c r i p t s which were p r e v i o u s l y unknown
i s s c h e d u l e d t o appear i n 1972." I n f a c t Godel thought i t i n a p p r o p r i a t e
t o s e p a r a t e t h e s e m a n u s c r i p t s from t h e c r i t i c a l e d i t i o n which t e n d s t o
s e l e c t only t h o s e p a s s a g e s whic'h s e r v e d B a l l y and Sechehaye as s o u r c e s
(SM, 1 0 2 j . R e c e n t l y t h e same s c h o l a r h a s a p t l y summarized t h e e d i t o r s '
work i n t h e f o l l o w i n g manner:

B a l l y and Sechehaye d e s e r v e u n q u a l i f i e d a p p r o v a l f o r t h e i r
a c c u r a c y and i n s i g h t : one can o n l y admire t h e i r s k i l l i n
assembling a v a r i e t y of m a t e r i a l i n t o a c l e a r and c o n s i s t e n t
e x p o s i t i o n . Yet t h e y may h a v e been t o o c a r e f u l i n 'weeding
o u t ' every d i s c r e p a n c y and unevenness, and s e t t i n g o u t t h e
a b s o l u t e coherence of t h e t h e o r y , i t s - s o t o s p e a k - mono-
l i t h i c u n i t y . The consequence was t h a t every c r i t i c i s m
d i r e c t e d a g a i n s t one p a r t i c u l a r i t e m a p p a r e n t l y e n t a i l e d
t h e r e j e c t i o n of t h e whole t h e o r y . (1966: 482).

The r e a d e r a l e r t e d t o t h e a c t u a l s i t u a t i o n might b e d i s i n c l i n e d t o a g r e e
w i t h Godells p r a i s e , of t h e e d i t o r s ' g e n e r a l l y v e r y s u c c e s s f u l c o m p i l a t i o n
and w i t h E n g l e r ' s s t a t e m e n t t h a t h i s c r i t i c a l e d i t i o n c o n s t i t u t e s a n
i n d i r e c t hornmage t o B a l l y and Sechehaye. We have had t o p o i n t o u t on
o c c a s i o n i n t h e f i r s t p a r t of our s t u d y a few i n s t a n c e s i n which t h e
e d i t o r s ' emendations tended t o b e m i s l e a d i n g ( c f . 1.2.2, and 1 . 3 . 1 ) .
It may b e t h a t some of t h e a p p a r e n t c o n t r a d i c t i o n s i n t h e C o w s h a v e
proven f r u i t f u l ( c f . t h e d i s c u s s i o n a b o u t t h e q u e s t i o n w h e t h e r l a n g u a g e
i n i t s e s s e n c e i s 'form' o r ' s u b s t a n c e ' ) ; on t h e o t h e r hand, t h e y might,
as Godel s u g g e s t e d , h a v e l e d a number of l i n g u i s t s t o c r i t i c i z e and p e r h a p s
even d i s c a r d S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r y o n l y t o o q u i c k l y ( c f . Chomsky, 1 9 6 4 f f . ;
C o l l i n d e r , 1968) .
T h i s p a r t of o u r s t u d y p u r s u e s t h r e e p r i n c i p a l g o a l s w i t h i n t h e
d i s c u s s i o n of t h e v a r i o u s i n f l u e n t i a l c o n c e p t s of S a u s s u r e ' s l i n g u i s t i c
theory: 1 ) i t w i l l t r e a t t h e q u e s t i o n of a n t e c e d e n t s , s u g g e s t e d and
a c t u a l , of t h e s p e c i f i c Saussurean concept ( i t s purpose b e i n g p a r t l y t o
l i n k t h e second p a r t c l o s e r w i t h t h e f i r s t ) ; 2) i t w i l l a t t e m p t t o r e -
e s t a b l i s h S a u s s u r e ' s views i n t h e l i g h t of t h e c r i t i c a l e d i t i o n and o t h e r
r e c e n t f i n d i n g s by Godel and Engler; 3) i t w i l l o u t l i n e major l i n e s of
post-Saussurean developments of t h e concept i n q u e s t i o n . It should b e
emphasized a t t h i s p o i n t t h a t w e a r e of t h e o p i n i o n t h a t each i n d i v i d u a l
c o n c e p t m e r i t s monograph t r e a t m e n t s i m i l a r t o F. G . M e i e r ' s d i s c u s s i o n
o f t h e problem of t h e z e r o i n l ' i n g u i s t i c s ( s . Meier, 1 9 6 1 ) , E n g l e r ' s
p r e s e n t a t i o n of d i v e r g i n g views on t h e a r b i t r a i r e ( s . Engler, 1962 and
1 9 6 4 ) ~ ' and De Mauro's a t t e m p t a t a r e - i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f S a u s s u r e ' s semantic
t h e o r y (s. De Mauro, 1969) o r P. ~ i c l g u ' s s t u d y of t h e l a n g u a g e s i g n
and t h e problem of m o t i v a t i o n (s. Miclgu, 1970). Such monograph t r e a t m e n t s
a p p e a r p a r t i c u l a r l y d e s i r a b l e w i t h r e f e r e n c e t o t h e whole q u e s t i o n of
p o s t Saussurean developments. I n our BibZiographia Saussureana, 1870-1970
( P a r t I, S e c t i o n 4 ) we have a t t e m p t e d t o g i v e a n e x h a u s t i v e l i s t of a l l
secondary l i t e r a t u r e d e a l i n g w i t h t h e s e most i n f l u e n t i a l c o n c e p t s ; w e l l
o v e r a hundred i t e m s d e a l i n g w i t h t h e kngue/paroZe d i s t i n c t i o n , a l m o s t
150 i t e m s devoted t o t h e synchronyldiachrony dichotomy, and more t h a n 400
a r t i c l e s , n o t e s and c h a p t e r s i n books d i s c u s s i n g v a r i o u s a s p e c t s of t h e
language sign, a l l s e r v e t o underscore t h i s d e s i r a b i l i t y . In t h i s respect
t h e b i b l i o g r a p h i c a l d a t a c o l l e c t e d and o u r p r e s e n t account c a n b e r e g a r d e d
o n l y as a p r e l i m i n a r y d i s c u s s i o n of t h e problems i n v o l v e d , n o t o n l y con-
c e r n i n g t h e s o u r c e s of S a u s s u r e ' s l i n g u i s t i c i n s p i r a t i o n and h i s own
( g r a d u a l l y e v o l v i n g ) f o r m u l a t i o n s b u t a l s o w i t h r e g a r d t o modern i n t e r -
p r e t a t i o n s of h i s more i n f l u e n t i a l c o n c e p t s .
 FOOTNOTES - 2.012.1

See W. Magczak, " C r i t i q u e du s t r u c t u r a l i s m e " , FoL 3:169-77 (1969),

a t p. 170.

See Margaret Masterman, "The Nature of a Paradigm", Criticism

and the Growth of Knowledge ed. by Imre Lakatos and Alan Musgrave (Cam-
b r i d g e : Cambridge Univ. P r e s s , 1970), 59-89, i n p a r t i c u l a r pp. 61-5
i n which t h e r e l e v a n t p a s s a g e s a r e quoted (= Kuhn, 1970: x , 2, 4 f . , 10,
l o f . , 11, 1 4 , 1 7 f . , 23, 37, 43, 5 9 f . , [ 6 2 f . ] , 76, 85, 92, 102, 112, 120,
121, 1 2 8 ) . Cf. a l s o t h e c r i t i c i s m of Dudley Shapere, "The S t r u c t u r e
of S c i e n t i f i c ~ e v o l u t i o n s " , The PhiZosophicaZ Review 73:383-94 (1964),
esp. pp. 384-9.

.
S J. Watkins ' a t t i m e s r a t h e r polemic paper, "Against 'Normal
Science"', i n t h e volume l i s t e d i n n o t e 2, pp. 25-37, a t p. 37.

Claude ~ b i - ~ t r a u s sf,o r example, r e p l i e d t o L.-A. Zbinden's

i n t e r v i e w q u e s t i o n "Quand vous p a r l e z d e r i h o l u t i o n s a u s s u r i e n n e
11
... . 11

J e l ' e n t e n d s a u s e n s d e r 6 v o l u t i o n c o p e r n i c i e n n e . Les deux me p a r a i s s e n t

d ' g g a l e importance. I' (Gazette de Lmsanne: Gazette Z i t t z r a i r e of Febr .
16/17, 1963; we owe t h i s r e f e r e n c e t o D r . R. E n g l e r ) . For a s i m i l a r
s t a t e m e n t , s. G. C. Lepschy i n SSL 5:21 (1965).

Cf. B. Trnka i n 1929 (TCLP 1:33, n o t e where h e a l s o g i v e s t h e

y e a r 1923 i n s t e a d of 1922 f o r t h e p u b l i c a t i o n of t h e 2nd ed. of t h e
CLG); Bloomfield (1933:18, whom a number of American l i n g u i s t s f o l l o w e d ) ;
Spang-Hanssen (1954: 142) ; T a g l i a v i n i (1963: 305) ; Dinneen (1967: 1 9 , 212,
and 196, n o t e 2 ) ; Lyons (1968: 38); ~ r g d g r i cF r a n c o i s i n Le Langage comp.
by A. M a r t i n e t ( P a r i s : Gallimard, 1968), p. 45, and P. H. S a l u s (1969:3,
note 1).
6
Cf. Kaspar Rogger, Vom Wesen des LautwandeZs (Leipzig: S e l b s t -
v e r l a g d e s r o m a n i s t i s c h e n Seminars; P a r i s : E. Droz, 1934), p. 181;
G. F. Meier (1961:234); H. G. Wittmann (1966:83, n o t e 1; 1968:12; 1970:
283). I r o n i c a l l y , Engler h i m s e l f committed t h i s e r r o r ( s e e LTS, 9 ) .

Cf. Robins (1967: 200) ; t h i s a f f i r m a t i o n was made d e s p i t e a n

e x p l i c i t r e f e r e n c e t o t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n of t h e f i r s t ed. (CLG, 7-11)
and t h e Sources manuscrites on p. 234, n o t e 3. Robins' r e c e n t r e v i e w of
CLG(E) i n J L 6:302-4 (1970) does n o t d i s p r o v e t h e i m p r e s s i o n t h a t h e
i s o n l y s u p e r f i c i a l l y a c q u a i n t e d w i t h t h e Cows. A s i m i l a r judgement
must b e passed on Mounin (1968: 20) who should by now h a v e known b e t t e r .
T h i s erroneous view i s s t i l l h e l d by H e l b i g (1970: 3 3 ) .
 8
C h a r a c t e r i s t i c a l l y , A. Sechehaye noted i n h i s review a r t i c l e on
t h e CLG, "Les problsmes d e l a l a n g u e 2 l a l u m i s r e d ' u n e n o u v e l l e t h s o r i e " ,
RPhiZos 74:l-30 (1917) a t p. If "Franz Bopp e s t l e p r e m i e r q u i , dans un
ouvrage p u b l i g en 1816, k u d i a c e s r a p p o r t s a v e c une e x a c t e mgthode
11

This i s t r u e d e s p i t e t h e f a i r number of r e v i e w s t h e f i r s t ed.

of t h e CLG r e c e i v e d ( c f , Koerner, Bib Ziographia Saussureana, 1870-19 70,
P a r t I, S e c t i o n 3 ( b ) ) , among them by s c h o l a r s such a s M e i l l e t , Jacob
Wackernagel, J e s p e r s e n , K a r l J a b e r g , Grammont, and Schuchardt.

lo A number of t h e i r w r i t i n g s a r e l i s t e d i n Koerner, Bibliographia

Saussureana, 1870-1970, P a r t 11, S e c t i o n 2 ( a ) .
l1 According t o Max Niedermann (Neue Zurcher Zeitung, No. 200
[ J u l y 20th, 19081, n.p.) B a l l y r e p o r t e d , on t h e o c c a s i o n of t h e Geneva
c e l e b r a t i o n of t h e 25th a n n i v e r s a r y of S a u s s u r e ' s ~Grnoirei n 1908,
' Q i e d i e i n s e i n e n [ i . e . FdS's] Vorlesungen a n g e l e g t e n K o l l e g i e n h e f t e
von Hand z u r Hand wandern, w i e r e i f e G e l e h r t e d i e s e l b e n von jungen
S t u d e n t e n borgen und welche n i c h t zu ahnende F i i l l e von Anregungen, von
genialen Ideen aus d i e s e r Quelle geflossen ist."

l2For a n a n a l y s i s of t h e c o n t e n t s of t h e f i r s t c o u r s e s e e SM,
53-65.

l3 Godel h a s r e c e n t l y r e - e s t a b l i s h e d t h e s e l a s t l e c t u r e s of S a u s s u r e
i n Geneva SchooZ Reader ( l 9 6 9 ) , 39-52.

l4 A f t e r completion of t h e SM ( c f . Godel's remarks on p. 5 3 ) ,

Godel's a t t e n t i o n was drawn t o t h e e x i s t e n c e of a l i s t of t h e s t u d e n t s
who a t t e n d e d t h e s e c o u r s e s p r e p a r e d by Lgopold G a u t i e r i n J u n e 1949
( c f . Godel's remark i n CFS 16: 23 [1958/59]). Through t h e k i n d i n t e r -
v e n t i o n of R. Engler ( i n August l 9 6 9 ) , w e h a v e b e e n a b l e t o r e c e i v e t h e
c o n t e n t s of t h e l i s t now i n R. Godel's p o s s e s s i o n and a r e t h u s a b l e t o
g i v e t h e f o l l o w i n g breakdown of t h e number of s t u d e n t s who a t t e n d e d
t h e s e c o u r s e s and t h e names of t h o s e whose n o t e s have b e e n p r e s e r v e d :
1 ) Cours I (1907): 6 s t u d e n t s e n r o l l e d ; t h e e d i t o r s had n o t e s from Louis
C a i l l e (whose s h o r t h a n d n o t e s w e r e n o t l i s t e d by Godel [SM, 151 b u t w e r e
handed o v e r t o Engler by A. R i e d l i n g e r [ p e r s o n a l communication]); C a i l l e ' s
n o t e s were used by R i e d l i n g e r , t h e most i m p o r t a n t s o u r c e f o r t h e f i r s t
and second c o u r s e , f o r t h e composition of h i s m a n u s c r i p t of o v e r 250
pages ( c f . SM, 1 3 0 ) . 2) Cows I1 (1908109): 1 2 s t u d e n t s e n r o l l e d f o r
t h e w i n t e r s e m e s t e r and, we assume, went on i n t h e summer s e m e s t e r which
was a t t e n d e d by f i v e more s t u d e n t s . Among them were ~ G o ~ o G l da u t i e r ,
.
A l b e r t R i e d l i n g e r , and F r a q o i s Bouchardy ( c f CLG(E) , x i ) whose n o t e s
were a v a i l a b l e t o t h e e d i t o r s , probably a l s o t h o s e of P a u l F. Regard
which h a v e n o t been r e c o v e r e d b u t which w e r e used by R e i d l i n g e r t o
complete h i s n o t e s ( c f . SM, 1 3 0 ) , and f i n a l l y Emile C o n s t a n t i n whose
v e r y v a l u a b l e n o t e s were found o n l y a f t e r completion of Godel's d i s s e r -
t a t i o n of 1957 ( c f . CFS 16:23-32). 3) Cows I11 (1910111): 1 2 s t u d e n t s
a t t e n d e d , among them C o n s t a n t i n , t h e only s t u d e n t who had a l s o a t t e n d e d
t h e second c o u r s e , and two more s t u d e n t s who j o i n e d d u r i n g t h e summer
s e m e s t e r . The n o t e s t a k e n by Mrne. M a r g u e r i t e Sechehaye, George ~ 6 g a -
l l i e r , and F r a n c i s Joseph w e r e made a v a i l a b l e t o t h e e d i t o r s . Cf. a l s o
t h e l i s t of s t u d e n t s ' n o t e s of o t h e r c o u r s e s t a u g h t by S a u s s u r e (SM,
16-7, and CFS 17:5-11 [19601).

T h i s procedure, though t h e e d i t o r s thought i t j u s t i f i e d b e c a u s e

S a u s s u r e ' s i d e a s evolved d u r i n g h i s l e c t u r e s , was c r i t i c i z e d by one of
S a u s s u r e ' s s t u d e n t s a few y e a r s a f t e r t h e p u b l i c a t i o n of t h e Cows.
S e e Paul-F. Regard i n t h e p r e f a c e t o h i s t h e s i s , Contribution 6 '6tude
des przpositions dans Za Zangue du Nouveau Testament ( P a r i s : E. Leroux,
1919), 3-12 a t pp. 11-2. Regard a r g u e s t h a t i t would h a v e b e e n more
v a l u a b l e t o h a v e p u b l i s h e d t h e l o n g i n t r o d u c t i o n of t h e second c o u r s e
t o g i v e a n i d e a of S a u s s u r e ' s f o r c e f u l mind.

l6 Cf. CLG(E), 21, 58, 63, 9 9 , 108, 116, 118, 132, 134, 135, 136-7,
139-40, 142-3, 145-6, 198, 246, 247, 266, 273, 290, 291-2, 316, 337,
386, 393, 397, 417, 420, 430, 458, 459, 467, 477-8, 481, 482, 483, 504,
a n d 505 f o r t h o s e passages which a p p e a r t o have b e e n added by t h e e d i t o r s
of t h e Corns.

l7 The d i s t r i b u t i o n of t h e i n d i v i d u a l s o u r c e s f o r t h e CLG h a s b e e n
o u t l i n e d by Godel (SM, 103-12); of c o u r s e t h e CLG(E) g i v e s t h e complete
s o u r c e s i n columns 2 t o 6.

l8 B a l l y quoted t h i s v e r y s e n t e n c e on one o c c a s i o n a s i f i t had

b e e n f o r m u l a t e d by S a u s s u r e h i m s e l f ; see h i s LGLF, p. 17: "En f a c e d e
ces d i f f i c u l t & , une s e u l e mgthode p a r a T t r a i s o n n a b l e , c e l l e que F. d e
S a u s s u r e a resumge dans l a d e r n i s r e p h r a s e d e s o n Corns ... : 'La
l i n g u i s t i q u e a pour unique e t v & r i t a b l e o b j e t l a langue e n v i s a g g e en
elle-mzme e t pour elle-mZme'." This s t a t e m e n t h a s f r e q u e n t l y been quoted,
w i t h a p p r o v a l , i n t h e l i t e r a t u r e , most r e c e n t l y by Helbig (l970:35).

l9 Notes in6dites personneZZes de Ferdinand de Sausswe ed. by

R. E n g l e r (Wiesbaden: 0 . H a r r a s s o w i t z [ i n p r e s s ] ) ; v o l I1 of CLG(E),
c o n t a i n i n g i n d i c e s and o t h e r t e x t s w i l l n o t appear b e f o r e t h i s one.

20 D e Mauro (1969:125ff .) i s one of t h e few s c h o l a r s who makes

e x p l i c i t u s e of t h e r e - e s t a b l i s h e d i n t r o d u c t i o n of S a u s s u r e ' s second
c o u r s e of 1908/09 i n CFS 15:6-103 (1957).
2.2 Discussion of the Fundamental Concepts of Saussure's Lin-
I

guistic Theory and Their Post-Saussurean Evolution

The Cours did not bear the imprimatur of the

author: it was a posthumous c o m p i k t i o n based
on students ' notes. As a r e s u l t , the book ' s
influence i s derived from single passages -
o f t e n detached from the r e s t of the work -
which appeared t o the reader t o contain spe-
ciaZZy stirmZating i n s i g h t s . For several
decades a f t e r the pubZication of the Cours
it seemed as i f Saussure's conceptions were
b e s t s m a r i z e d by a series of dichotomies
... and by notions such as the arbitrary
character of the Zinguistic sign. These were
o f t e n starting-points for theoretical excur-
sions which moved far away from Saussure's
thought.
Giulio C . Lepschy (19 70 :43)

Chaque si2cZe a Za g r m a i r e de sa phizosophie.

Le moyen iige a essay; de fonder Zaegramaire
sur Za Zogique, e t , jusqu 'au X V I I I siacZe, Za
grarnmaire gdn5raZe n ' a St2 qu 'un pro Zongement
de Za Zogique. Le XI^ si2cZe en dtendant a m
f a i t s psychiques e t s o c i a m Za mdthode d'obser-
vation des f a i t s qui e s t en usage duns Zes s c i -
ences physiques e t natureZZes depuis Za Renais-
sance, a conduit h prPsenter Za g r m a i r e de
chacque Zangue come un ensemble de f a i t s .
Mais jusqu ' i c i ces f a i t s ne sont gu2re coordonn6s.
Les notes de cours de F. de Saussme, dditdes
sous Ze t i t r e de Cours de linguistique ggngrale,
ont indiquz comment on y pourrait mettre un com-
mencement d'ordre. Mais i Z r e s t e B faire un
grand t r a v a i l pour ordonner Zes f a i t s Zinguis-
tiques au point de uue de Za Zangue mzme.

Antoine Meillet in 1921 (LHLG I, p. viii)

 2.2.1 The D i s t i n c t i o n between kngue and paroZe and i t s
R e l a t i o n t o Zangage I

I n any l i n g u i s t i c study, it i s necessmy

t o distinguish between language and speech.
AZthough t h i s d i s t i n c t i o n has been cZassic
i n Zinguistics a t Zeast since the time of
F . de Saussure, modem l i n g u i s t i c s , i n f Zu-
enced by behavioristic and p o s i t i v i s t i c
ideas, has o f t e n confused the two. Because
of t h i s confusion, the importance of t h i s
cZassic d i s t i n c t i o n must be re-emphasized.

J. J. Katz and P. M. P o s t a l i n 1964

*

2.2.1.1 P r e c u r s o r s o f t h e kngue/paroZe Dichotomy o r t h e

kngue/paro Ze/kngage Trichotomy

Es sind die greifbarsten and anscheinend

t r i v i a l s t e n .hYkenntnisse, an d i e s i c h d e
S a u s s u r e m i t Vortiebe ZZt. Wo &re z.B.
i n seinem Buche e i n Aufstieg zu finden zu
Perspektiven eines W. von Humboldt ...
Und doch ging d e S a u s s u r e den Humboldt-
schen Aspekten von ergon und energeia aus
eigener Arbeitserfahrung nach und hat d i e
AngeZegenheit einer Zinguistique de Za
Zangue ' i n Abhebung von einer Zinguis-
tique de Za paroZef uns fast entscheidungs-
r e i f vordiskutiert .
K a r l Biihler i n 1934 ( s . ~ G h l e r , 1965: 7)

A s s o o f t e n happens i n human a f f a i r s , o u r c u r i o s i t y a b o u t t h e
o r i g i n of t h e a u t h o r ' s i d e a s i s e a s i l y a r o u s e d , p a r t i c u l a r l y when
f a c e d w i t h such a p l e t h o r a of seemingly o r i g i n a l views; and indeed
many have wondered what t h e s o u r c e s of S a u s s u r e ' s i n s p i r a t i o n might
have been. Among t h e many c o n c e p t s expounded i n t h e f i r s t h a l f of t h e
Corns (CLG, 13-192), much a t t e n t i o n h a s been devoted t o t h e langue/
parole d i s t i n c t i o n , and a number of s c h o l a r s even s u g g e s t e d t h a t i t
must h a v e been Humboldt's famous ergon/energeia c o n t r a s t which had
1
a n t i c i p a t e d S a u s s u r e ' s i n f l u e n t i a l dichotomy.
T h i s c o n t e n t i o n , however,
2
was s e r i o u s l y q u e s t i o n e d by John V. M. Verhaar i n 1962, and c o n v i n c i n g l y
r e f u t e d by Hugo Mueller i n 1 9 6 6 , ~w i t h t h e r e s u l t t h a t no comment needs
t o b e added ( c f . a l s o 1.3.4.1).
It h a s been noted on o c c a s i o n t h a t S a u s s u r e d i s t i n g u i s h e d between
t h r e e terms, langue, parole, and kngage ( c f . CLG, 112), and t h e r e f o r e
a number of s c h o l a r s have r e a d i l y a c c e p t e d t h e view t h a t Georg von d e r
G a b e l e n t z , a l i n g u i s t of t h e Humboldtian t r a d i t i o n who was l a r g e l y i g n o r e d
b y h i s c o n t e m p o r a r i e s , must have f u r n i s h e d t h i s trichotomy. It i s c o r r e c t
t h a t Gabelentz d i d d i s t i n g u i s h , a s e a r l y a s 1891, between "Einzelsprache",
"Rede", and "Sprachvermijgen", but i n addition t o the f a c t t h a t Gabelentzts
epistemology i s q u i t e d i s t i n c t from t h a t of S a u s s u r e (which a c c o u n t s
f o r t h e d i s s i m i l a r n o t i o n s behind t h e concepts proposed), S a u s s u r e r a r e l y
used t h e t e r m facult6 du Zangage and t h e n as a r u l e i n i t s every-day
s e n s e ( c f . CLG, 25-7), and never thought of making i t t h e o b j e c t of
l i n g u i s t i c s a s Gabelentz proposed t o do ( c f . 1.3.4.1.2). Even i f we
concede t h a t t h e t r i p a r t i t e d i v i s i o n i n t h e Cours ( c f . CLG(E), 41) owes
something t o G a b e l e n t z t s t r i c h o t o m y , i t cannot b e s u f f i c i e n t l y s t r e s s e d
t h a t t h e c o n t e n t s of each term i n q u e s t i o n a r e q u i t e d i s s i m i l a r .4 By t h e
same t o k e n , C o s e r i u t s s u g g e s t i o n (1962:282) t h a t F. N. F i n c k f o r s t a l l e d
5
S a u s s u r e ' s dichotomy i n h i s book of 1905 ( c f . 1.3.4.3) must b e r e j e c t e d .
By c o n t r a s t w i t h Humboldt and t h o s e l i n g u i s t s who a c c e p t e d h i s
views, i t a p p e a r s more l i k e l y t h a t a p h i l o s o p h e r w i t h a more r i g o r o u s
system of thought ( t h a n Humboldt and h i s f o l l o w e r s ) could w e l l h a v e had
a n impact on Saussure: Georg Wilhelm F r i e d e r i c h Hegel (1770-1831),
p r o b a b l y t h e most i n f l u e n t i a l 19 t h c e n t u r y t h i n k e r who i n luenced ( i n t e r
a l i a ) V i c t o r Henry (1850-1907) w i t h whose work S a u s s u r e was c e r t a i n l y
f a m i l i a r and who w r o t e a monograph e n t i t l e d Antinomies Zinguistiques
( P a r i s : Alcan, 1896) which c l e a r l y r e v e a l s t h e Hegelian a n t i t h e t i c a l
manner of argument .6 Furthermore Hegel, i n t h e t h i r d r e v i s e d e d i t i o n
of h i s EncycZopGdie of 1830, devoted a number of paragraphs t o d i s c u s s i o n
of t h e s i g n c o n c e p t and language.7 Hegel c r i t i c i z e d t h e g e n e r a l l y h e l d
view t h a t s i g n s and language had t o b e thought of a s a n a p p e n d i x t o
psychology o r a s something t o b e i n s e r t e d i n t o l o g i c w i t h o u t r e c o g n i z i n g
t h a t t h e y a r e n e c e s s a r i l y c o r r e l a t e d w i t h i n t h e system of t h e a c t i v i t y
of t h e i n t e l l e c t . 8 Although Hegel w a s concerned p r i m a r i l y w i t h q u e s t i o n s
c o n c e r n i n g t h e human mind i n g e n e r a l and problems connected w i t h t h e
( i n d i v i d u a l ) psychology of r e p r e s e n t a t i o n and r e c o g n i t i o n , h e r e f e r s t o
9
Hurnboldt's famous e s s a y of 1827, Eber d e n Dualis, and c l e a r l y p o i n t s
10
o u t t h e primacy of t h e spoken language i n c o n t r a s t t o t h e w r i t t e n form.
Hegel d i s t i n g u i s h e d , though o n l y e n p a s s a n t y e t n o t w i t h o u t emphasis,
between l a n g u a g e and s p e e c h , between " d i e Rede, und i h r System, d i e
11
Spr ache It.
Hegel can hardly b e regarded a s having f o r e s t a l l e d Saussure's
Zangue/paroZe d i s t i n c t i o n i n i t s v e r y s u b s t a n c e (and indeed h e may w e l l
h a v e b e e n of importance f o r o t h e r i d e a s of S a u s s u r e ' s , c f . 2.2.5).
The s c h o l a r who a n t i c i p a t e d t h i s dichotomy w a s w i t h o u t doubt Hermann
P a u l ( c f . 1.3.2.2); P a u l ' s d i s t i n c t i o n between "Sprachusus" and " i n d i v i -
d u e l l e ~ p r e c h t g t i g k e i t " ( c f . 1.3.2.2.2, and a l s o De Mauro, 1968:350)
comes v e r y c l o s e t o S a u s s u r e ' s c o n c e p t s i n a number of r e s p e c t s . However,
P a u l s t r e s s e d t h e i n d i v i d u a l a s p e c t of language a n a l y s i s r a t h e r t h a n
t h e s o c i a l and normative s i d e of language. I n addition, Paul d i d not
make any p a r t i c u l a r u s e of t h e i d e a s which emphasize the systematic
n a t u r e of l a n g u a g e a s d i d Saussure. I n c o n c l u s i o n , we a r e s a f e i n s a y i n g
t h a t , w h i l e t h e r e are c l e a r i n d i c a t i o n s t h a t S a u s s u r e ' s p r i n c i p l e s w e r e
conceived as a r e s u l t of i n f l u e n c e from o t h e r l i n g u i s t s of h i s time,
t h e r e c a n b e no doubt t h a t w i t h o u t S a u s s u r e ' s r e f o r m u l a t i o n of t h i s
d i s t i n c t i o n t h e Zangue/paroZe c o n t r a s t would never have r e c e i v e d t h e
s t a t u s i n g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y i t h a s enjoyed s j n c e t h e p u b l i c a t i o n
of t h e C o r n .
F i n a l l y , we wish t o emphasize once a g a i n t h a t we h a v e found no
e v i d e n c e t o s u p p o r t t h e c o n j e c t u r e f r e q u e n t l y made i n t h e " h i s t o r i e s "
of l i n g u i s t i c s t h a t S a u s s u r e was under t h e d i r e c t and i n f a c t v i g o r o u s
i n l u e n c e o f Durkheim's s o c i o l o g i c a l t h e o r i e s ( c f . 1.2.2). Pleillet ,
h i m s e l f a one-time c o l l a b o r a t o r of Durkheim and once a p u p i l of S a u s s u r e ,
s t r o n g l y opposed W. Doroszewski's c o n t e n t i o n t h a t S a u s s u r e had r e c e i v e d
h i s i n s i g h t i n t o t h e n a t u r e of language and h i s c o n v i c t i o n of a n e c e s s a r y
d i s t i n c t i o n between language a s a system and t h e i n d i v i d u a l speech a c t
i n which t h e system o r p a r t of i t i s a c t i v a t e d from e x t r a - l i n g u i s t i c
s o u r c e s ( c f . A[2]CIL, 1 4 7 ) . I f t h e r e was such an i n f l u e n c e , and t h e r e
are i n d i c a t i o n s t h a t S a u s s u r e w a s aware of developments i n d i s c i p l i n e s
o t h e r t h a n l i n g u i s t i c s , i t might w e l l have been a n i n d i r e c t one through
M e i l l e t ' s i n a u g u r a l a d d r e s s a t t h e ~ o l l G g ed e F r a n c e i n February 1906,
"L'Etat a c t u e l d e s 6 t u d e s d e l i n g u i s t i q u e g 6 n 6 r a l e U , w i t h which S a u s s u r e
12
was c e r t a i n l y f a m i l i a r . To r e i n f o r c e our argument f u r t h e r , we would
p o i n t o u t t h a t from t h i s p a p e r i t would appear t h a t B r g a l had s t r e s s e d
13
t h e s o c i a l c h a r a c t e r of language i n h i s Essai de sgmantique of 1897.
B r d a l observed, f o r i n s t a n c e , w i t h r e f e r e n c e t o i n d i v i d u a l l i b e r t y
c o n c e r n i n g t h e m o d i f i c a t i o n of language t h a t i t " t i e n t a u b e s o i n d ' g t r e
compris, c t e s t - & d i r e q u ' e l l e e s t d e meme s o r t e que l e s a u t r e s l o i s q u i
r e g i s s e n t n o t r e v i e s o c i a l e " (quoted from LHLG I , 1 7 ) . However, Brgal's
s o c i o l o g i s m c a n , as we b e l i e v e , b e t r a c e d t o Whitney's Vie du Zangage
( P a r i s 1875), and t h u s i t i s c o n c e i v a b l e t h a t t h e s o c i o l o g i c a l t r a d i t i o n
i n l i n g u i s t i c s was i n i t i a t e d by t h e American l i n g u i s t who was t h e f i r s t
t o i n c o p o r a t e s o c i o l o g i c a l n o t i o n s (probably under t h e i n l u e n c e of
S p e n c e r i a n i d e a s ) i n t o t h e s t u d y of language. Whitney's i m p o r t a n t i n -
f l u e n c e on S a u s s u r e h a s been demonstrated e a r l i e r i n t h i s s t u d y ( c f . 1 . 3 . 1 ) ;
however, h e n e v e r d i s t i n g u i s h e d c l e a r l y between language and s p e e c h , and
t h e r e f o r e c a n n o t b e c i t e d a s h a v i n g a n t i c i p a t e d S a u s s u r e ' s Zangue/paroZe
dichotomy.
Durkheimian i d e a s , on t h e o t h e r hand, were c e r t a i n l y c u r r e n t a t t h e
t u r n of t h e c e n t u r y and have t o b e reckoned w i t h i n e s t a b l i s h i n g t h e
i n t e l l e c t u a l paradigm of t h a t p e r i o d . Our d e n i a l of any d i r e c t i n f l u e n c e
of Durkheim on S a u s s u r e i s s u p p o r t e d by H. Arens (1969:583) and H. H6rmann's
s t a t e m e n t of 1967 w i t h which we may conclude t h i s s e c t i o n .

D i e b e i Durkheim anklingende Gegenuberstellung von G b e r i n d i v i -

d u e l l e r T a t s a c h e e i n e r s e i t s , i n d i v i d u e l l e r M a n i f e s t a t i o n und
Auswirkung a n d e r e r s e i t s , w i r d denn - a l l e r d i n g s wohl unabhsngig
von Durkheim - p r z z i s e g e f a s s t b e i dem Genfer L i n g u i s t e n D e
Saussure .... 14
2.2.1.2 The Development and P l a c e of t h e Zangue/paroZe/Zangage
D i s t i n c t i o n i n S a u s s u r e ' s Theory o f Language

... Za Zangue e s t un ensemble de

conventions n6cessaires adoptges par
Ze corps social pour permettre Zfu-
sage de la facuttg du Zangage chez
.
Zes individus La facult; du Zangage
e s t un f a i t d i s t i n c t de Za Zangue,
mais qui ne peut sfexercer sans eZZe.
Par Za parole, on dzsigne Z'acte de
Z 'individu rGa Zisant sa facuZt5 au
moyen de Za convention sociale, qui
e s t Za Zangue.
F. d e Saussure i n 1908 (CFS 15:lO)

Apart from R. Godel, i t i s c e r t a i n l y R. Engler who i s t h e b e s t -

informed s c h o l a r about t h e e v o l u t i o n of S a u s s u r e ' s thought, s i n c e i n
a d d i t i o n t o h i s p u b l i c a t i o n of t h e c r i t i c a l e d i t i o n of t h e Cows (1967-68)
and t h e v e r y u s e f u l Lexique de Za terminology saussurienne (LTS) i n 1968,
Engler h a s devoted h i s s c h o l a r l y a c t i v i t y almost e x c l u s i v e l y t o t h e
e l u c i d a t i o n of S a u s s u r e ' s o r i g i n a l i d e a s ( c f . Engler, 1 9 5 9 f f . ) . l5 F u r t h e r -
more, Engler h a s been engaged f o r some time i n p r e p a r i n g a n e d i t i o n of
t h e h i t h e r t o unpublished papers on g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c problems from
S a u s s u r e ' s own pen, t h e Notes i n z d i t e s personnelles scheduled t o appear
i n 1972. E n g l e r ' s r e c e n t s t a t e m e n t t h a t S a u s s u r e ' s system of l i n g u i s t i c
thought d i d n o t s p r i n g i n one f e l l swoop from h i s mind ( a s Aphrodite i s
s a i d t o have sprung from t h e head of Zeus i n Greek mytho1ogy)and that:
t h e r e f o r e S a u s s u r e ' s u s e of p a r t i c u l a r terminology w a r r a n t s a c a r e f u l
e v a l u a t i o n , 1 6 cannot b e s u f f i c i e n t l y s t r e s s e d i n o r d e r t o p o i n t o u t t h e
problem of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of S a u s s u r e ' s i d e a s w i t h which t h e a n a l y s t i s
confronted. The d i s t i n c t i o n between Zangue and parole and i t s r e l a t i o n
t o Zangage o r , a t times, Za facult5 de Zangage r e p r e s e n t s one of t h e most
p u z z l i n g components of S a u s s u r e ' s d o c t r i n e and h a s been a p t l y c h a r a c t e r i z e d
by N. C. W. Spence i n 1957, t h e 100th a n n i v e r s a r y of S a u s s u r e ' s b i r t h ,
a s a 'hardy p e r e n n i a l ' (cf . ArchL 9: l f f .) .
 I n f a c t t h e e v o l u t i o n and a l m o s t continuous m o d i f i c a t i o n of t h e
Zangue/pm?oZe dichotomy and t h e , t h r e e f o l d d i s t i n c t i o n (which i n c l u d e s
t h e f a c u l t y of speech) c a n b e t r a c e d o v e r a p e r i o d of more t h a n twenty
y e a r s i n S a u s s u r e ' s academic c a r e e r . I n h i s f i r s t l e c t u r e s a t t h e Univer-
s i t y of Geneva i n November 1891 ( c f . SM, 3 6 ) , S a u s s u r e observed a b o u t t h e
n a t u r e of language and t h e manner i n which i t ought t o b e s t u d i e d :

Lungue e t Zangage n e s o n t qu'une m z m e chose; l ' u n e s t l a

g 6 n 6 r a l i s a t i o n de l ' a u t r e . Vouloir 6 t u d i e r l e langage s a n s
s e donner l a p e i n e d'en 6 t u d i e r l e s d i v e r s e s m a n i f e s t a t i o n s
qu'6videmrnent s o n t l e s Zangues, e s t une e n t r e p r i s e absolu-
ment v a i n e , e t chimgrique; d'un a u t r e c S t 6 , v o u l o i r 6 t u d i e r
les l a n g u e s en o u b l i a n t que c e s l a n g u e s s o n t p r i m o r d i a l e -
ment r 6 g i e s p a r c e r t a i n s p r i n c i p e s q u i s o n t r6sum6s dans
l t i d 6 e d e Zangage, est un t r a v a i l e n c o r e p l u s d6nu6 d e t o u t e
signification sgrieuse, de toute base scientifique v6ritable.
(CFS 12:65, w i t h c o r r e c t i o n s from CLG(E), 515).

I n t h i s e a r l y pronouncement S a u s s u r e n o t o n l y thought t h a t Zangue and

Zangage were e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l l y i d e n t i c a l b u t a l s o took t h e l a t t e r term
a s t h e more a b s t r a c t concept of t h e two. I n addition, generalizations
a b o u t language c o u l d o n l y b e deduced from t h e r e s u l t s of a n a l y s e s of more
t h a n one language ( S a u s s u r e t h e n argued) t h u s showing h i m s e l f f u l l y i n
l i n e w i t h contemporary l i n g u i s t i c t h i n k i n g ( e . g . t h e argument of P a u l
[1.3.2.2.2] and Gabelentz 11.3.4.2.21). I n h i s unfinished a p p r a i s a l
d r a f t e d i n 1894 of Whitney's c o n t r i b u t i o n t o l i n g u i s t i c s ( c f . SM, 43-6),
which w a s used by t h e e d i t o r s i n t h e i r c o m p i l a t i o n of t h e Corns ( c f .
CLG(E) , 155, 162, l 6 8 f . , 19 7, 265f., 5O5f., and 514), l7 S a u s s u r e spoke
of t h e p a r t i c u l a r system "de symboles ind&endants q u i e s t l e langage"
(1894: l 3 ) , l8 and a b o u t " c e t t e s e m i o l o g i e p a r t i c u l i & e q u i e s t l e langage"
(p. 31; c f . Godel's f o r m u l a t i o n SM, 1 4 2 ) . From t h e s e two q u o t a t i o n s
i t a p p e a r s t h a t Zangage was t h e n used a s t h e o v e r a l l term i n c o n t r a s t
w i t h l a t e r usage. However, on t h e same page S a u s s u r e a l s o noted: "I1
n'y a d e ' l a n g u e ' e t d e s c i e n c e d e l a l a n g u e q u ' i l a c o n d i t i o n i n i t i a l e
/ /
d e f a i r e a b s t r a c t i o n de c e q u i a p r e c e d e
/
... " (p. 31a?). From t h i s
co-occurrence of langue and Zangage w e may conclude t h a t S a u s s u r e d i d n o t
e n v i s a g e a c l e a r d i s t i n c t i o n between t h e s e two terms. l9 1n f a c t i t i s
a t t e s t e d by s t u d e n t s ' n o t e s ( c f . SM, 132) t h a t even i n h i s second c o u r s e
(1908/09) S a u s s u r e d i d n o t r i g o r o u s l y d i f f e r e n t i a t e between t h e s e terms
s p e a k i n g of Zangage a s h a v i n g "fondamentalement l e c a r a c t s r e d ' u n e systsme".
A s i m i l a r s i t u a t i o n p r e v a i l e d f o r a l o n g p e r i o d i n t h e development
of S a u s s u r e ' s concept of paroze. I n h i s e a r l y l e c t u r e s of 1891 S a u s s u r e
employed t h i s e x p r e s s i o n i n conformity w i t h o r d i n a r y usage ( c f . SM, 1 4 2 ) ;
parole i s viewed a s ( t h e a b i l i t y o f ) s p e e c h . Godel (SM, 143) p o i n t s
o u t t h a t one c o u l d w e l l a s k whether t h e Zangue/paroZe d i s t i n c t i o n was
s i m p l y a b s e n t from S a u s s u r e ' s l i n g u i s t i c argument u n t i l 1907. On t h e
o t h e r hand, Godel s p e a k s of Whitney 's "formule r 6 v & l a t r i c e " i n s i s t i n g
t h a t language is a s o c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n (LSL, 48, 152, 177, e t c . ; LGL,
280, 3 0 9 ) , and, probably i n s p i r e d by Whitney's claim, S a u s s u r e f o r m u l a t e d
a s e a r l y a s 1894 and p o s s i b l y f o r t h e f i r s t t i m e h i s i d e a s a b o u t " c e t t e
s6;miologie p a r t i c u l i S ? r e q u i e s t l e langage" (CLG(E) , 1 9 7 ) , i n t r o d u c i n g h i s
famous comparison of a language s t a t e w i t h t h e p o s i t i o n of chessmen (1894:
1 0 = CLG(E) , 198; cf . CLG, 43, 125-7, 153-4, 185) 20 . However, t h e s e
c o n s i d e r a t i o n s h a d , a s f a r a s we can s e e a t p r e s e n t , no d i r e c t r e s u l t
on t h e Zangue/paroZe d i s t i n c t i o n , a l t h o u g h we admit t h a t i d e a s p e r t a i n i n g
t o S a u s s u r e ' s concept of langue may f i r s t h a v e been conceived i n t h e mid-
1890s and p o s s i b l y e a r l i e r .
We c l a i m t h a t o b s e r v a t i o n s made by M e i l l e t i n h i s 1906 p a p e r mentioned
above ( c f . 2.2.1.1) d i d p l a y t h e d e c i s i v e and r e v e a l i n g r 6 l e i n m a t t e r s
c o n c e r n i n g t h e s o c i a l n a t u r e of language. It s h o u l d b e r e c a l l e d t h a t i n
December of t h a t y e a r S a u s s u r e was e n t r u s t e d w i t h t h e c o u r s e on g e n e r a l
l i n g u i s t i c s which h e s t a r t e d t e a c h i n g i n January 1907. I n t h e meantime,
i.e. between r o u g h l y 1894 and 1906, S a u s s u r e a p p e a r s t o h a v e abandoned
t h e i d e a of p u t t i n g t o g e t h e r a g e n e r a l t h e o r y of language s i n c e h e was
d i s c o u r a g e d a b o u t a c h i e v i n g h i s g o a l ( c f . SM, 3 1 ) . 21 I n h i s inaugural
a d d r e s s M e i l l e t made a number of s t a t e m e n t s which sound s u r p r i s i n g l y
11
Saussurean" ( c f . a l s o n o t e 1 2 ) , a s we w i l l d e m o n s t r a t e by s e t t i n g M e i l l e t 's
f o r m u l a t i o n s s i d e by s i d e w i t h t h o s e found i n t h e C o w s :

MeiZZet in 1906 S a u s s w e (after 1907)

. . l e l a n g a g e e s t gminernment ... l e l a n g a g e e s t un f a i t
un f a i t s o c i a l . s o c i a l (CLG, 21) .22
. . une l a n g u e c o n s t i t u e un s y s - La l a n g u e e s t un systsme de
tsme complexe d e moyens d'expres- signes ... (CLG, 33; c f . a l s o
sion. . . . pp. 32, 106, 116, 1 8 2 ) .
 [La l a n g u e est un] s y s t s m e oG t o u t ... l a langue ... est d e
se tient ( c f . a l s o LHLG , n a t u r e homoghe: c ' e s t un
11, 1 5 8 ) . i 3 '
Le l a n g a g e e s t une i n s t i t u t i o n a-
systsme d e s i g n e s
... ... (p. 3 2 ) .
l a langue e s t une i n s t i -
y a n t son autonomie .... t u t i o n pure ... . (p. 110)
... l e l a n g a g e e s t une i n s t i t u - ... l a l a n g u e e s t une i n s t i -
tion sociale ... (LHLG I, 16-7). tution sociale ... ( p . 33; c f .
CLG(E), 45).

I n h i s p a p e r M e i l l e t n o t o n l y s t r e s s e d t h e s o c i a l n a t u r e of l a n g u a g e
( c f . t h e above q u o t a t i o n s ) b u t a l s o s t a t e d t h a t "une i n n o v a t i o n i n d i v i -
duelle n e p e u t que d i f f i c i l e m e n t t r o u v e r p l a c e s i . . . elle n'est pas
exactement a d a p t g e 2 c e syst2me [ d e l a l a n g u e ] , c'est-;-dire si elle
n ' e s t p a s en harmonie avec l e s r s g l e s g g n g r a l e s de l a langue." (LHLG I,
16). I f W. Doroszewski is c o r r e c t i n s a y i n g t h a t S a u s s u r e i n t r o d u c e d
t h e f a c t o r of parole a s " l a p a r t i e i n d i v i d u e l l e " i n o r d e r t o cope w i t h
t h e problem of language e v o l u t i o n , 2 4 i t would s u p p o r t o u r c l a i m t h a t
M e i l l e t ' s a r t i c l e may w e l l h a v e g i v e n r i s e t o S a u s s u r e ' s dichotomy.
Where t h e n a t u r e of language i s concerned, M e i l l e t emphasized t h a t
- language i s s o c i a l i n t h e way t h a t i t b e l o n g s t o a g i v e n l i n g u i s t i c com-
munity a s a means of communication and does not depend on any of i t s
members f o r i t s m o d i f i c a t i o n (Zoc. c i t . , 16f .) . I n f a c t the individual
s p e a k e r i s o b l i g e d t o f o l l o w l i n g u i s t i c usage and t h u s c o n t r i b u t e s t o
t h e maintenance of t h e h i g h e s t p o s s i b l e d e g r e e of i d e n t i t y of a g i v e n
language (p. 1 7 ) . M e i l l e t c a r r i e s h i s i d e a s about t h e s o c i a l c h a r a c t e r
of language even f u r t h e r a r g u i n g t h a t l i n g u i s t i c changes a r e c o n d i t i o n e d
by changes i n t h e s t r u c t u r e of t h e s o c i e t y , b u t f o r t h e p r e s e n t p u r p o s e
25
t h e o b s e r v a t i o n s p a r a p h r a s e d h e r e s h o u l d s u f f i c e t o make o u r p o i n t .
S a u s s u r e a f f i r m e d t h a t language a s a s o c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n i s inde-
pendent of t h e i n d i v i d u a l (CLG, 37; CLG(E), 5 6 ) , and t h a t a l l i n n o v a t i o n s ,,g
of parole remain i n d i v i d u a l e x p r e s s i o n s u n l e s s t h e y a r e a c c e p t e d by t h e
26
c o l l e c t i v i t y and t h u s become p a r t of langue (CLG, 138; CLG(E), 224).
I n h i s p e r s o n a l n o t e s p r e p a r e d f o r t h e t h i r d c o u r s e S a u s s u r e had a c t u a l l y
written: " ~ al a n g u e e s t c o n s a c r g e s o c i a l e m e n t e t n e d6pend pas d e
l ' i n d i v i d u l ' (CLG(E). T h i s a f f i r m a t i o n a p p e a r s t o echo M e i l l e t ' s s t a t e -
ment of s e v e r a l y e a r s e a r l i e r . However, we must p o i n t o u t t h a t though
M e i l l e t may have s u g g e s t e d t h e d i s t i n c t i o n individual v e r s u s sociaz t o
Saussure, h e made n o mention of t h e term parole; and f u r t h e r m o r e M e i l l e t
used Zangage and k n g u e synonymo'usly s o t h a t h i s famous s t a t e m e n t a b o u t
language a s a system "0; t o u t se t i e n t " h a s r i g h t l y been i n t e r p r e t e d
as "expressing a commonplace i d e a r a t h e r t h a n a n o r i g i n a l view" (Lepschy,
1970: 3 4 ) , p a r t i c u l a r l y s i n c e M e i l l e t never took t h i s n o t i o n t o i t s
t h e o r e t i c a l conclusion. Without minimizing t h e v a l u e of M e i l l e t ' s
s u g g e s t i o n s , w e a r e convinced t h a t t h e c o n t r a s t between Zangue and
parole (and S a u s s u r e d i d t h i n k of them a s a " p a i r e d e choses" (CLG(E)
41) was a t l e a s t p a r t l y conceived under t h e i n f l u e n c e of P a u l ' s d i s t i n c t i o n
27
between Sprachusus and i n d i v i d u e l l e Sprechtztigkeit ( c f . 1 . 3 . 2 . 2 . 2 ) .
We s a i d " a t least p a r t l y " , and t h i s S a u s s u r e may have done more
i n o p p o s i t i o n t h a n i n agreement w i t h P a u l ' s d o c t r i n e , s i n c e Godel (1966:
4 8 3 f f . ) emphasized t h e theoretical n e c e s s i t y which S a u s s u r e f e l t i n
d i s t i n g u i s h i n g between t h e s e two a s p e c t s of language a n a l y s i s . In his "'t'

c o u r s e of 1907 S a u s s u r e spoke of language a s a system on t h e one hand ,

and t h e language a s a n endowment of t h e i n d i v i d u a l on t h e o t h e r a s s i g n i n g
t h e term Zangue t o t h e former and kngage t o t h e l a t t e r (which h e l a t e r
on termed more c l e a r l y " f a c u l t 6 du langage")
28
.
When d e a l i n g w i t h q u e s t i o n s
of language change, i n p a r t i c u l a r a n a l o g i c a l f o r m a t i o n , S a u s s u r e i n t r o d u c e d
f o r t h e f i r s t t i m e t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between langue and parole ( c f . SM, 57-8).
S a u s s u r e t h e n a f f i r m e d t h a t kngue i s what h a s been a c q u i r e d by t h e
i n d i v i d u a l and h a s t h u s been s t o r e d i n h i s mind, whereas paroZe was
conceived of a s t h e more s o c i a l s p h e r e s i n c e s p e e c h i s t h e a c t i v e and
t h e s o c i a l l y r e l e v a n t a s p e c t of language ( c f . SM, 145-6).
Two i m p r e s s i o n s a r i s e from t h e s e a f f i r m a t i o n s : f i r s t l y , t h a t Saussure
f e l t t h e n e c e s s i t y of d i s t i n g u i s h i n g between Zangue and parole i n o r d e r
v4
t o back up h i s d i s t i n c t i o n between synchrony and d i a c h r o n y i n e x p l a i n i n g
t h e phenomenon of analogy ( c f . CLG, 2 2 3 f f . , and 2 3 1 f f . ) , and s e c o n d l y ,
t h a t S a u s s u r e ' s dichotomy i n f a c t evolved s t e p by s t e p , t h e s o c i a l / i n d i -
v i d u a l c o n t r a s t f i r s t b e i n g conceived i n i n v e r s e o r d e r b e f o r e i t found
i t s now well-known p a r a l l e l .
Godel (SM, 147) n o t e s a number of correspondences between t h e second
(1908/09) and t h i r d c o u r s e (1910/11) w i t h r e g a r d t o t h e d i s t i n c t i o n under
discussion: 1 ) S a u s s u r e r e c o g n i z e d t h e d i f f i c u l t y of d e f i n i n g t h e
o b j e c t of l i n g u i s t i c s ; 2) h e emphasized t h e n e c e s s i t y of s e p a r a t i n g
Zangue from t h e facuZt6 du Zangage; 3) h e b e l i e v e d t h a t t h e n a t u r e of
l a n g u a g e cannot b e a d e q u a t e l y a s s e s s e d u n l e s s what happens between two
i n t e r l o c u t o r s h a s been a n a l y z e d ; 4) Zangue and paroZe h a v e t o b e d i s -
tinguished.
B e f o r e t r e a t i n g t h i s l a t t e r d i s t i n c t i o n S a u s s u r e s e p a r a t e s Zangage,
I1
l a n g u e c o n s i d 6 r 6 chez l ' i n d i v i d u " , a s a f a c u l t y , t h e b a s i s of human
s p e e c h , from Zangue which h e (now) c h a r a c t e r i z e s as "une c h o s e 6min6ment
s o c i a l e " ( c f . SM, 147) a d d i n g t h a t o n l y t h o s e t h i n g s become l i n g u i s t i c a l l y
r e l e v a n t which have t u r n e d i n t o f a c t s of everyone b e l o n g i n g t o a g i v e n
s p e e c h c o r m n ~ n i t ~ It
. ~ s~h o u l d b e emphasized t h a t t h e f a c u l t y of s p e e c h
is, i n S a u s s u r e 's view, n o t p r i m a r i l y concerned w i t h a r t i c u l a t i o n , t h e
a s p e c t s of speech p r o d u c t i o n from a p h y s i o l o g i c a l p o i n t of view, b u t
w i t h t h e p s y c h i c a l f a c t o r s which permit man t o o r g a n i z e l a n g u a g e s i g n s
i n order t o express himself. However, t h e i n v e s t i g a t i o n of t h i s f a c u l t y
is t h e o b j e c t of psychology and n o t of l i n g u i s t i c s . Langue, as a s o c i a l
i n s t i t u t i o n , owes i t s e x i s t e n c e t o t h i s f a c u l t y , S a u s s u r e r e p e a t e d f r e -
q u e n t l y , b u t Zangue i s t h e o b j e c t p r o p e r of l i n g u i s t i c s ( c f . a l s o CLG, 3 8 f . )
even i f t h e f a c u l t y of speech presupposes i t ( c f . SM, 1 4 8 ) .
S a u s s u r e , i n t r y i n g t o d e f i n e t h e o b j e c t of l i n g u i s t i c s , d i d n o t
f o l l o w t h e e m p i r i c a l argument which a s s e r t s t h e primacy of speech ( c f .
P a u l ) , though t h e Corns r e a d s : " . . . historiquement, l e f a i t de p a r o l e
prEcSde t o u j o u r s " (CLG, 37) 30 . I n f a c t S a u s s u r e acknowledged t h a t langue
w a s n o t t h e "ph'enom&e i n i t i a l " (CLG(E), 57) b u t f o r t h e t h e o r i s t of l a n -
guage Zangue p r e c e d e s parole, an argument which Godel (SM, 149) a t t e m p t e d
t o i l l u s t r a t e by t h e f o l l o w i n g diagram:

FacuZtZ individueZ Ze Langue s v e n t i o n s o c i a l e )

( a c t e d e l ' i n d i v i d u r g a l i s a n t s a f a c u l t 6 a u moyen d e l a c o n v e n t i o n s o c i a l e )
 However, we b e l i e v e t h a t Godel's diagram does n o t show c o n v i n c i n g l y
t h e precedence S a u s s u r e c l a i m e d ' f o r h i s concept of langue b u t t e n d s
i n s t e a d t o f o c u s a t t e n t i o n on parole. S t a t e m e n t s made by S a u s s u r e i n
t h e second c o u r s e ( c f . CFS 1 5 : 9 f f . and t h e q u o t a t i o n a t t h e b e g i n n i n g
of t h i s chap.) r e v e a l a d i f f e r e n t u n d e r s t a n d i n g of t h e terms and t h e i r
r e l a t i o n s h i p , i n p a r t i c u l a r concerning t h e f a c u l t y of speech which i s ,
a c c o r d i n g t o S a u s s u r e ( s . CFS 15:10), t h e conditio sine qua MOM of
l a n g u a g e though n o t a n o b j e c t of l i n g u i s t i c s . We t h e r e f o r e would l i k e
t o s u g g e s t a d i f f e r e n t g r a p h i c p r e s e n t a t i o n of what S a u s s u r e a p p e a r s
t o have had i n mind:

facultZ du Zangage
/
(= e x i s t e n c e of language and t h e
b u t outside l i n g u i s t i c s proper)

(= 1 ) i n d i v i d u a l r e a l i z a t i o n of (= s o c i a l convention forming a
Zangue and 2) s o u r c e of l i n - system of s i g n s which p e r m i t s
g u i s t i c innovation) encoding and decoding of parole)

Zangage
(= t h e t o t a l i t y of l i n g u i s t i c e x p r e s s i o n , n o t
directly accessible t o the investigator)

S i n c e paroZe e x h i b i t s t h e p r o p e r t i e s of langue o n l y i m p e r f e c t l y
( c f . CLG, 38), i t becomes secondary t o t h e l i n g u i s t ( p a r t l y r e v e r s i n g
t h e o r i g i n a l c o n c e p t of t h i s phenomenon i n S a u s s u r e ' s f i r s t c o u r s e ) ,
and of n o p a r t i c u l a r i n t e r e s t t o S a u s s u r e ( c f . CLG, 1 9 7 , n o t e ) . This
f a c t i s c l e a r l y i n d i c a t e d by S a u s s u r e ' s p l a n of t h e g e n e r a l d i v i s i o n s of
h i s t h i r d course: lol e s Zangues; 2" l a langue; 3" facultz e t exercice
du Zangage chez l e s individus ( s . Engler , 1967 :119) .31 No p a r t i c u l a r
mention i s made of parole.
However, parole was r e g a r d e d by S a u s s u r e a s t h e i n d i v i d u a l ' s r e a l i -
z a t i o n of t h e language system, t h e speech a c t . Godel n o t e d t h a t S a u s s u r e
spoke of ex&ution of l i n g u i s t i c s i g n s by t h e i n d i v i d u a l (1966:489; c f .
CLG, 30) b u t h e a l s o c h a r a c t e r i z e d i t as discours i n t h e second c o u r s e
( c f . SM, 158, 259; and LTS, 2 0 ) ; though a p p a r e n t l y o n l y once. Saussure
a r r i v e d a t t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between Zangue and parole a t a v e r y l a t e s t a g e
i n t h e development of h i s l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y , a f a c t which may a c c o u n t
f o r t h e d i f f i c u l t i e s and a p p a r e n t c o n t r a d i c t i o n s t o b e found i n t h e
d e f i n i t i o n s of t h e s e terms and t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p . Saussure attempted
t o s o l v e t h e s e problems i n t h e t h i r d c o u r s e by p r e s e n t i n g t h e f o l l o w i n g
diagram ( n o t i n c l u d e d i n t h e CLG):

Langage

{
t o g e t h e r w i t h t h e d e s c r i p t i o n of t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of t h e two con-
stituents: 1 ) Langue a s " p a s s i v e e t r g s i d a n t dans l a c o l l e c t i v i t 6 " ,
and as "code s o c i a l , o r g a n i s a n t l e l a n g a g e e t formant l ' o u t i l n g c e s s a i r e
2 l ' e x e r c i s e d e l a f a c u l t 6 du langage", and 2) parole as b o t h " a c t i v e
e t i n d i v i d u e l l e " (CLG(E), 41f.; SM, 1 5 3 ) . I n addition, as l a t e as i n
S p r i n g 1911, S a u s s u r e envisaged f o r t h e f i r s t t i m e t h e p o s s i b i l i t y of
d i s t i n g u i s h i n g between a l i n g u i s t i c s of parole and a l i n g u i s t i c s of
Zangue ( c f . CLG(E) , 42; CLG, 38f .) . Langage, which i n e a r l i e r u s e s was
t h o u g h t of a s b e i n g i d e n t i c a l w i t h langue and which s h i f t e d l a t e r t o
t h e meaning of " f a c u l t y of speech", i s now b e i n g conceived of a s n o t
c l e a r l y d e f i n a b l e and n o t d i r e c t l y a c c e s s i b l e t o t h e l i n g u i s t , s i n c e
i t i s "multiforme e t h 6 t & o c l i t e n (CLG, 25) b u t a s comprising b o t h t h e
s o c i a l system of language and i t s i n d i v i d u a l a c t u a l i z a t i o n t h u s a l l o w i n g
f o r t h e t r i p a r t i t i o n and d e f i n i t i o n of Zangage = langue + parole (CLG, 112;
CLG(E), 172).
This t r i p a r t i t e d i v i s i o n , Engler (1966:37, and LTS, 30) observed,
however, i s r e a d i l y reduced t o t h e two opposing terms of Zangue and
parole which b o t h d e s e r v e t h e l i n g u i s t ' s a t t e n t i o n . 32 However, a s
we h a v e p o i n t e d o u t e a r l i e r i n t h i s c h a p t e r , S a u s s u r e ' s sympathies w e r e
c l e a r l y i n f a v o u r of a l i n g u i s t i c s of langue, and i t i s w i t h t h i s term
t h a t many d i f f i c u l t i e s r a i s e d by l a t e r g e n e r a t i o n s of l i n g u i s t s a r e
connected. But t h e term of parole which i s u s u a l l y s e e n i n o p p o s i t i o n
w i t h Zangue i s n o t unequivocal ' e i t h e r . Saussure himself pointed out
t h a t i n d e a l i n g w i t h parole, t h e a c t i v e , c r e a t i v e , and i n d i v i d u a l a s p e c t
of language, two f u n c t i o n s would have t o b e d i f f e r e n t i a t e d : 1) the
g e n e r a l u s e of t h e f a c u l t i e s of s p e e c h ( h i n t i n g a t t h e a c o u s t i c and
a r t i c u l a t o r y a s p e c t s ) ,33 and 2) t h e i n d i v i d u a l u s e of t h e language code
"selon l a pensge i n d i v i d u e l l e " (CLG(E) , 42) .
Although t h e i r i n t e r r e l a t i o n c o u l d n o t h a v e been completely d e n i e d
b y ~ a u s s u r e langue
,~~ and parole can b e s e e n i n o p p o s i t i o n t o each o t h e r
i n t h e f o l l o w i n g manner:

Zangue 1) represents the s o c i a l f a c t , 2) i s p a s s i v e (depending on t h e

c o l l e c t i v e ) , and 3) c o n s t i t u t e s a code (agreed upon by t h e speech
community), whereas
parole 1 ) d e s i g n a t e s t h e i n d i v i d u a l (speech) a c t , 2) i s a c t i v e (depen-
d i n g on t h e w i l l of t h e i n d i v i d u a l ) , and 3 ) r e a l i z e s t h e code ( i n
the individual act).

The n o t e s of two s t u d e n t s i n S a u s s u r e l s second c o u r s e confirm t h e i n t e r -

dependence of t h e s e two a s p e c t s a s t h e Cows (24) i m p l i e s : i n language,
S a u s s u r e had a r g u e d , t h e r e a r e always t h e two s i d e s which correspond
t o each other;

language i s
C social

individual
( c f . CFS 15:9). These two a s p e c t s
h a v e t o b e t a k e n t o g e t h e r i n o r d e r t o account f o r " l a sph&e o; l a l a n g u e
vit", S a u s s u r e m a i n t a i n e d , adding t h a t forms and grammar have a s o c i a l
e x i s t e n c e o n l y (and t h e r e f o r e b e l o n g t o Zangue) though l i n g u i s t i c change
starts from t h e i n d i v i d u a l ( c f . (CLG(E), 2 8 ) . On t h e o t h e r hand S a u s s u r e
a d m i t t e d , though h e a l s o claimed t h a t Zangue i s a c o n c r e t e o b j e c t of
l i n g u i s t i c i n v e s t i g a t i o n ( c f . SM, 1 5 7 ) , t h a t we know Zangue only through
t h e m a n i f e s t a t i o n s of language i n parole ( c f . SM, 1 5 5 ) . This concession
would seem t o c o n t r a d i c t S a u s s u r e ' s g e n e r a l l y much more " r a t i o n a l i s t i c "
p o s i t i o n which c l a i m s t h a t Zangue i s independent of parole ( c f . CLG (E) ,
56). But two t h i n g s should b e k e p t i n mind when one a t t e m p t s t o r e s o l v e
apparent c o n t r a d i c t i o n s i n Saussure's teachings: F i r s t l y , Saussurels
i d e a s evolved c o n s i d e r a b l y w i t h ' r e g a r d t o t h e h n g u e / p a r o Z e / h n g a g e
trichotomy; h i s i d e a s about t h i s d i s t i n c t i o n were developed f a i r l y l a t e
i n h i s l i f e (by c o n t r a s t w i t h t h e diachronylsynchrony d i s t i n c t i o n , f o r
example) and must have s t r u c k S a u s s u r e by t h e i r r e v e a l i n g c h a r a c t e r when
h e r e a l i z e d t h e i r importance,35 w i t h t h e r e s u l t t h a t h e might n o t have
found t h e t i m e n e c e s s a r y t o r e s o l v e a l l t h e v i t a l q u e s t i o n s s u r r o u n d i n g
this distinction. Secondly, i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h h i s view t h a t i t i s
" l e p o i n t d e vue q u i c r 6 e l l o b j e t " (CLG, 24), S a u s s u r e worked o u t s o many
f i n e d i s t i n c t i o n s between and a s p e c t s of t h e v a r i o u s f e a t u r e s of l a n -
guage t h a t i t i s q u i t e i m p o s s i b l e t o r e l a t e a s i n g l e d e f i n i t i o n of h n g u e
t o t h e ( e q u a l l y a m b i v a l e n t ) c o n c e p t of p a r o l e . 36 As an i l l u s t r a t i o n
of t h e d i f f i c u l t i e s t h e i n t e r p r e t e r of S a u s s u r e i s f a c e d w i t h , we may
c i t e Godel who h a s devoted a v e r y i n f o r m a t i v e c h a p t e r t o t h i s d i s t i n c t i o n
(SM, 142-59), c o n c l u d i n g h i s d i s c u s s i o n w i t h t h e f o l l o w i n g remark:

I1 s e p e u t que dans c e r t a i n s o r d r e s d e r e c h e r c h e s , l a d i s -
t i n c t i o n s a u s s u r i e n n e a p p o r t e moins d e l u m i g r e que d e t r o u b l e ,
mais on n e p e u t p l u s c o n c e v o i r d e v g r i t a b l e l i n g u i s t i q u e q u i
n e se f o n d e s u r une d g f i n i t i o n d e l a langue. (SM, 1 5 9 ) .

To t h e l i n g u i s t of today, p a r t i c u l a r l y s i n c e t h e r e i n f o r c e m e n t which
u'
t h e Zangue/paroZe d i s t i n c t i o n h a s r e c e i v e d a s one of t h e major p o i n t s
d ' a p p u i of Chomsky's Aspects ( c f . Chomsky, 1965: 4 ) , t h e view t h a t l i n -
g u i s t i c s p r o p e r i s concerned w i t h h n g u e , t h e s o c i a l code and t h e under-
l y i n g o p e r a t i o n a l system of speech ( c f . n o t e 3 5 ) , h a s become a l m o s t
unanimously a c c e p t e d . The f a c t t h a t S a w s u r e h a s made more s u g g e s t i o n s
c o n c e r n i n g t h e manner i n which language s h o u l d b e s t u d i e d t h a n h e c o u l d
s o l v e h i m s e l f h a s been one of t h e most v a l u a b l e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of t h e
 FOOTNOTES - 2.2.1/2.2.1.1/2.2.1.2

*J e r r o l d Jacob Katz, and P a u l M a r t i n P o s t a l , An Integrated Theory

o f Linguistic Descriptions (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT, 1964), p. i x .
Cf. Agenor ~ r t ~ m o v i a"0, ~ o t e n c i 6 l n o s t iv jazyce", SaS 1:148-51
(1935) ; E. t r a n s l . , "On t h e P o t e n t i a l i t y of Language", Prague School
Reader, 75-80 (1964) ; J u l i u s von L a z i c z i u s , "Die Scheidung langue -
parole i n d e r Lautf orschung", A [ 3 ] CISP, 13-23 (1939) ; r e p r i n Selected.
Writings of Gyula Laziczius, ed. by Thomas A. Sebeok (The Hague: Mouton,
.
l 9 6 6 ) , 77-89; Eugenio C o s e r i u i n 1952 (cf C o s e r i u , 1962: 43ff .); I o r d a n l
Bahner , 1962 :426, and L u t h e r , 19 70 :1 4 .

'8peech, Language and I n n e r Form (Some L i n g u i s t i c Remarks on Thought) ",

P[S]ICL, 748-55 (1964), a t p. 749.
"On Re-reading von ~ u m b o l d t " , E L L 19 :97-107 ( l 9 6 6 ) , e s p . pp.
99-102.

Cf. a l s o o u r forthcoming review a r t i c l e on t h e 1969 re-ed. of

Gabelentz 's Die Sprachwissenschaft (Tiib ingen: TBL) and t h e a r t i c l e of
E. C o s e r i u (1967b) which h a s b e e n r e p r i n t e d t h e r e , i n Lingua, v o l . 28.

De Mauro's (1968:350) r e f e r e n c e t o K a r l J a b e r g ' s review of t h e

CLG of 1916 ( r e p r . i n J a b e r g , 1965:123-36) on t h a t t o p i c does n o t p r o v i d e
t h e suggested information.

Cf. H. S c h u c h a r d t ' s review i n LGRP 18, c o l l . 238-47 (1897), p a r t l y

r e p r . i n Hugo Schuchardt Brevier, 328-9.

EncycZopaie der philosophischen Wissenschaften i r n Grundrisse,

3 r d r e v . and e n l . ed. (Heidelberg: A . Osswald, l83O), quoted a f t e r t h e
6th e d . , p r e p a r e d by Friedhelm N i c o l i n and O t t o PEggeler (Hamburg:
F. Meiner, 1959); s e e e s p . pp. 3 6 8 f f .
8
Hegel wrote: "Gew?hnlich w i r d d a s Zeichen und d i e Sprache irgendwo
a l s Anhang i n d e r Psychologie o d e r auch i n d e r Logik eingeschoben, ohne
d a s s a n i h r e Notwendigkeit und Zusammenhang i n dem Systeme d e r ~ z t i g k e i t
d e r I n t e l l i g e n z gedacht wiirde. " (Op. c i t . , p. 369).
9
B e r l i n : Kgnigliche Akad. d e r Wissenschaften, 1828, 27 pp. Cf.
Hegel, op. c i t . , p. 370.
 lo Hegel: "Bei d e r Tonsprache, a l s d e r u r s p r i i n g l i c h e n , kann auch
d e r [ s i c ] SchY.iftsprache, j edoqh h i e r n u r i m Vorbeigehen, erwzhnt wer-
den; s i e i s t nur e i n e wei.tere F o r t b i l d u n g i m besondem G e b i e t e d e r Sprache,
welche d i e Z u s s e r l i c h p r a k t i s c h e T z t i g k e i t zu HGlfe nimmt." (Up. c i t . ,
p. 371).

l1 Hegel op. c i t . , p. 369 (5 459) ; t h i s o b s e r v a t i o n was a l r e a d y

made i n t h e f i r s t ed. of t h e EncycZopZdie (Heidelberg: A. Osswald, l 8 l 7 ) ,
380. R a t h e r m i s l e a d i n g l y K. Miillner s t a t e d concerning t h e langue/
parole dichotomy : " ~ i e es Unterscheidung wurde von Ferdinand d e S a u s s u r e
... v u l g a r i s i e r t [ ! I , e r s c h i e n a b e r schon f r i i h e r b e i F. Hegel [!I
und W. von Humboldt [ ! I , i n d e r S p r a c h w i s s e n s c h a f t " [ t h e l a t t e r two
c l a i m s f o l l o w s u g g e s t i o n s by C o s e r i u ] (LuD 5: [ 8 1 ] [ l 9 7 l ] ) .

l2T h i s p a p e r was p u b l i s h e d i n Revue des idees ( P a r i s ) 3:296-308

(1906), and a l s o s e p a r a t e l y , C h a r t r e s : Impr. Durand, 1906, and was r e p r .
i n 1921 i n LHLG I , 1-18. I n t h i s i n a u g u r a l l e c t u r e M e i l l e t makes two
e x p l i c i t r e f e r e n c e s t o Michel BrGal (1833-1915), h i s former t e a c h e r ,
whose f u n c t i o n s h e t h e n t o o k o v e r ( c f . LHLG I, 1 and 1 7 ) , b u t none t o
Durkheim. I n t h i s p a p e r M e i l l e t s t a t e d : " O r , l e l a n g a g e e s t gminement
un f a i t social. On a souvent rGp% que les l a n g u e s n ' e x i s t e n t pas en
dehors des s u j e t s qui Zes parlent, .... C e t t e r g a l i t g [de l a langue]
est z l a f o i s l i n g u i s t i q u e e t s o c i a l e . E l l e e s t l i n g u i s t i q u e : c a r une
l a n g u e c o n s t i t u e un systgme complexe d e moyens d ' e x p r e s s i o n , sys tzme
02 t o u t se t i e n t e t o; une i n n o v a t i o n indiuiduezle n e p e u t que d i f f i -
cilement trouver place s i ... e l l e n ' e s t p a s exactement a d a p t g e 2 c e
systzme, .... A un a u t r e ggard, l a r g a l i t g d e l a l a n g u e est sociaze:
e l l e r g s u l t e d e c e qu'une l a n g u e a p p a r t i e n t 2 un ensemble d g f i n i d e
s u j e t s p a r l a n t s , de c e q u ' e l l e e s t l e moyen d e communication e n t r e l e s
membres d ' u n e msme groupe e t de c e q u ' i l n e dgpend d'aucun d e s membres
du groupe d e l a m o d i f i e r " (LHLG I , 16-7; our i t a l i c s ) . I n f a c t we b e l i e v e
t h a t t h i s p a s s a g e i s a v e r y s t r i k i n g document i n t h e development of Saus-
s u r e ' s d i s t i n c t i o n between t h e s o c i a l and t h e i n d i v i d u a l a s p e c t s of
language. Cf. a l s o M e i l l e t 's paper of roughly t h e same p e r i o d , "Comment
l e s mots changent d e s e n s " , r e p r . i n LHLG I, 230-71.

l3Essai de sZmantique: Science des significations ( P a r i s : Hachet t e ,

1897); 2nd e d . , 1899; 3 r d r e v . e d . , 1904; 4 t h ed. 1908; 5 t h e d . , 1911;
6 t h e d . , 1913, r u n n i n g through s i x e d i t i o n s d u r i n g FdS's l i f e t i m e .

l4Bans HGrmann, Psy chologie der Sprache (Berlin-Heidelb erg-New York:

S p r i n g e r , l 9 6 7 ) , p. 15. A s e a r l y a s 1939, V. Brbndal observed i n h i s
programmatic a r t i c l e , " L i n g u i s t i q u e s t r u c t u r a l e " , t h a t FdS had developed
h i s d i s t i n c t i o n i n d e p e n d e n t l y of Durkheim (AL 1 : 5 = Brbndal, 1943:90).

l5 Cf. a l s o t h e reviews of E n g l e r ' s e d i t i o n of t h e LTS by E. F. K.

Koerner i n Language 47:447-50 (1971) a s w e l l a s of t h e CLG(E), p r e p a r e d
by t h e same a u t h o r , t o appear i b i d . , 48, f a s c . 2 (1972) f o r a n appre-
c i a t i o n of E n g l e r ' s work on FdS.
 l6 Engler wrote: "Le 'systsme' n ' e s t p a s n 6 t o u t arm6 d e l a t G t e
d e Saussure. I1 f a u t s e rappel,er pour g a r d e r dans t o u t e i n t e r ~ r 6 t a t i o n
une c e r t a i n e l a t i t u d e aux termes." (1966:35).

l7There i s no c l e a r i n d i c a t i o n whether t h i s m a n u s c r i p t was used

on o t h e r o c c a s i o n s a s w e l l ; c f . CLG(E), 8 f . , 3 3 f . , 6 2 f . , 91, 1 8 6 f . ,
188, 189, 198, 264, 507.

W e q u o t e from a p r e - f i n a l d r a f t of t h e t e x t which i s s c h e d u l e d
t o appear i n E n g l e r ' s e d i t i o n of t h e Notes personneZZes i n z d i t e s de F&
(Wiesbaden: 0 . H a r r a s s o w i t z , 1972) which t h e e d i t o r was k i n d enough t o
p r o v i d e f o r t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y . G o d e l ' s t r a n s c r i p t i o n s i n SM, CFS 12:
59-65 (1954), and e l s e w h e r e a r e n o t always a c c u r a t e .

l9 I n a l e t t e r t o M e i l l e t d a t e d January 4, 1894, S a u s s u r e spoke of

" f a i t s d e langage" on t h e one hand and " l a l a n g u e en g & n & r a l W on t h e
o t h e r ; s e e SM, 3 1 = CFS 20:13 = CFS 21:95 (1964).
20
The i n d i c a t i o n s of t h e i n d e x (CLG, 321) a r e n e i t h e r always c o r r e c t
n o r complete. I n h e r a r t i c l e , " I n t r o d u c t i o n 2 un c o u r s d e l i n g u i s t i q u e
g&n&ale1', Nph 27: 21-30 (1942), B a r t i n a Harmina Wind a t t r i b u t e s t h i s
comparison t o J e s p e r s e n ( a t p. 24) who made u s e of t h i s analogy i n h i s
Mankind, Nation, and IndividuaZ from a Linguistic Point of V i m of 1925
(Oslo, H. Aschehoug & Co.; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Univ. P r e s s ) , p. 84.

21 FdS occupied h i m s e l f i n s t e a d w i t h Germanic l e g e n d s ( f o r i n s t a n c e

t h e NibeZungen) and anagrams i n v a r i o u s epochs of European l i t e r a t u r e
.
i n h i s s p a r e t i m e (cf De Mauro, 1968: 315-6) .
22 CLG(E), 2 1 p r i n t s "langue" f o r CLG, 21; i n f a c t t h e s o u r c e s r e a d
11
langue'' i n s t e a d of "langage" a s i n t h e above q u o t a t i o n , t h e e d i t o r s
h a v i n g changed t h i s i n t h e 3 r d ed. of t h e CLG i n 1931.

23 T h i s p h r a s e d e f i n i n g language a s "un s y s t s m e [ . . . ] 02 t o u t
s e t i e n t " was f r e q u e n t l y employed by M e i l l e t and can a l s o b e found i n
t h e w r i t i n g s of h i s p u p i l s , n o t a b l e i n J. Vendryes'. Cf. M e i l l e t ' s
pamphlet, La Linguistique ( P a r i s : Larousse, 1916 [1915], p. 7: "Toute
l a n g u e e s t un s y s t s m e rigoureusement a r t i c u l g ... , t o u t s e t i e n t dans
l e s y s t s m e d'une langue". It is i n t e r e s t i n g t o n o t e t h a t M e i l l e t u s e s
t h i s f o r m u l a t i o n i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h S a u s s u r e ' s t e a c h i n g s a t P a r i s (1881-
9 1 ) ; M e i l l e t t h e n was a p p a r e n t l y n o t aware of t h e f a c t t h a t S a u s s u r e ' s
l e c t u r e s on g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s were a b o u t t o b e p u b l i s h e d .
24
Cf. Doroszewski's p a p e r , "'Langue' e t ' p a r o l e ' : Une page d e 1'
h i s t o i r e d e s idGes g&&ales en l i n g u i s t i q u e " , PF 14: 485-97 (1929),
a t p. 493.

25 Towards t h e end of h i s programmatic p a p e r M e i l l e t s t a t e d : "Le

X I X ~ s i s c l e a g t g l e s i s c l e de l ' h i s t o i r e ... ; l e s sciences sociales
se c o n s t i t u e n t m a i n t e n a n t , e t l a l i n g u i s t i q u e y d o i t p r e n d r e l a p l a c e
que se n a t u r e l u i a s s i g n e . Ee moment e s t donc venu d e marquer l a
p o s i t i o n des problsmes l i n g u i s t i q u e s a u p o i n t de vue s o c i a l " (LHLG I.
1 8 ) . M e i l l e t ' s d o c t r i n e gave r i s e t o a g e n e r a t i o n of l i n g u i s t s , among
them Joseph Vendryes, Alf Sommerfelt, and Marcel Cohen, who p a i d much
a t t e n t i o n t o t h e s o c i a l a s p e c t of language. I n t h i s c o n t e x t i t i s of
h i s t o r i c a l i n t e r e s t t o r e f e r t o a book which Vendryes r e f e r r e d t o f r e -
q u e n t l y i n h i s Langage of 1921, ~ u g & e - ~ e r n a r dLeroy, Le Zangage: Essai
sur Za psychozogie normale e t psychoZogique de c e t t e fonction ( P a r i s :
F. Alcan, 1905). I n t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n of h i s s t u d y Leroy s u g g e s t e d t h e
f o l l o w i n g way t o approach t h e problem of t h e o r i g i n of l a n g u a g e a c c o r d i n g
t o two d i s t i n c t ' p o i n t s d e vues':
A
...
l1 l f o r i g i n e du l a n g a g e p e u t
e t r e envisagge s o i t c o m e f a i t indiuiduet, s o i t comrne f a i t sociaZ.
S i l ' o n c o n s i d s r e l e l a n g a g e s o u s s o n a s p e c t de ph&om&e s o c i a l , l a
question de son o r i g i n e implique l f 6 t u d e des rapports des i n d i v i d u s
e n t r e eux comparativement, a v a n t e t a p r & son a p p a r i t i o n ; ....
S i l ' o n c o n s i d z r e l e l a n g a g e s o u s s o n a s p e c t de ph6nom&e i n d i v i d u e l ,
... , on f a i t a u c o n t r a i r e g v i d e m e n t de l a psychologie" (op. c i t . ,
6; our i t a l i c s ) .

26 The p h r a s e , " c ' e s t l a p a r o l e q u i f a i t e v o l u e r l a langue" (CLG,

37) was added by t h e e d i t o r s ( c f . CLG(E) , 5 7 ) .

27 FdS n e v e r mentioned P a u l i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h t h i s d i s t i n c t i o n ;
however h e r e f e r r e d e x p l i c i t l y t o P a u l i n h i s u n f i n i s h e d review of
Sechehaye's Programme e t me'thode of 1908 ( c f . SM, 5 1 ) , and a l s o , c r i -
t i c a l l y , i n h i s i n t e r v i e w w i t h A. R i e d l i n g e r of January 1 9 , 1909 ( c f .
SM, 2 9 ) , and i n h i s second c o u r s e ( S p r i n g 1909; c f . SM, 75; CLG(E), 1 6 ) .

28 Cf. a l s o E n g l e r , 1967: 119-20 on S a u s s u r e ' s v a c i l l a t i o n between

t h e s e two terms .
29 Godel (SM, 148) q u o t e s a p a s s a g e from a n o t e by FdS w r i t t e n i n
t h e e a r l y 1890s i n which FdS s t a t e d t h a t a ) everyone i s endowed w i t h
t h e p o s s i b i l i t y of speech b u t t h a t b ) t h e i n d i v i d u a l can o n l y l e a r n
t o make u s e of t h i s f a c u l t y i f h e i s surrounded by a speech community
( c f . SM, 4 0 ) . I n t h i s m a n u s c r i p t w r i t t e n s e v e r a l y e a r s b e f o r e t h e
appearance of Durkheim's ~ 2 g Z e sde Za mgthode socio Zogique ( P a r i s : F.
Alcan, 1895) FdS a f f i r m e d : "La l a n g u e e s t un f a i t s o c i a l . "

30 Godel (SM, 149, b . 68) a s s e r t s t h a t t h i s s t a t e m e n t was added

by t h e e d i t o r s ; however, CLG(E), 57 shows t h a t t h e r e w a s a t e x t u a l b a s i s
f o r t h i s passage, a l t h o u g h t h e emphasis i s c e r t a i n l y t h e e d i t o r s .

31 FdS d i d n o t have time t o e x e c u t e t h i s p l a n completely; h e d i s -

cussed t h e e x i s t e n c e of v a r i o u s languages, and t h e g e n e r a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s
of language b u t n o t t h e i n d i v i d u a l ' s a p p l i c a t i o n of t h e speech code
.
(cf Godel, 1966: 492).

32 Engler (LTS, 31) noted a l s o : " ~ al o c a l i s a t i o n d e l a l a n g u e dans

...
l a ' p a r t i e r e c g p t i v e e t c o o r d i n a t i v e ' du c i r c u i t d e l a p a r o l e
c o r r i g e en un c e r t a i n s e n s l a formule ' l a n g a g e [=] l a n g u e [+I p a r o l e '
... q u i , 2 en c r o i r e l e sch&?, r e v i e n t 5 une j u x t a p o s i t i o n . "

33 There a r e i n d i c a t i o n s t h a t FdS n o t o n l y meant "phonationff when

h e r e f e r r e d t o "usage d e s f a c u l t & en g&&al" b u t probably a l s o t h e
" f a c u l t ; d e c o o r d i n a t i o n " (SM, 154) and perhaps a l s o , a s t h e e d i t o r s
s u g g e s t e d , t h e f a c u l t y of a s s o c i a t i o n (CLG, 29).

34 FdS a f f i r m e d , however, i n a n o t e of 1910/11: "La l a n g u e e s t

c o n s a c r g e s o c i a l e m e n t e t n e dgpend pas d e l ' i n d i v i d u " ( c f . CLG(E), 4 1 ) .
This c o n t e n t i o n a p p e a r s t o b e i n c o n t r a d i c t i o n w i t h t h e a g r e e d f a c t
t h a t l i n g u i s t i c change i s t r i g g e r e d by parole b e f o r e i t becomes o r may
become a f a c t of langue ( c f . CLG, 1 3 8 ) . It i s c u r i o u s t o n o t e t h a t t h e
s t a t e m e n t " c ' e s t l a p a r o l e q u i f a i t g v o l u e r l a langue" (CLG, 37) a s w e l l
a s t h e concl.usion t h a t t h e r e i s "donc i n t e r d g p e n d a n c e d e l a l a n g u e e t
d e l a p a r o l e " ( i b i d . ) - quoted i n s u p p o r t of h i s argument by B a l l y i n
1926 ( J P s 23:694, n . 2) - were added by t h e e d i t o r s ( c f . CLG(E) , 5 7 ) ,
a p r o c e d u r e s i m i l a r t o t h a t n o t e d i n 2.2, n o t e 13. We b e l i e v e t h a t t h i s
a p p a r e n t c o n t r a d i c t i o n c a n o n l y b e r e s o l v e d i f t h e synchrony/diachrony
d i s t i n c t i o n is c o n s i d e r e d a s w e l l . FdS had i n f a c t a s s e r t e d : "Tout
c e q u i est d i a c h r o n i q u e dans l a l a n g u e n e l ' e s t que p a r l a p a r o l e "
(CLG(E), 223). See a l s o chap. 2.2.2.2 of t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y .

35 It i s i n t h i s r e s p e c t t h a t we i n t e r p r e t FdS's emphasis made i n

a n i n t e r v i e w w i t h ~ 6 o p o l dG a u t i e r on May 6, 1911: " ~ r e m i s r e& i t 6
[about t h e n a t u r e of language s t u d y ] : l a l a n g u e est d i s t i n c t e d e l a
p a r o l e . " (SM, 30).

36 Engler (LTS, 3 l f . ) g i v e s ( a p a r t from t h e o t h e r usage of t h e

t e r m i n t h e s e n s e of "tongue" o r "speech" of a g i v e n n a t i o n ) t h e f o l -
lowing c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of t h e v a r i o u s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s of langue: 1 )
a s a b s t r a c t i o n from languages, 2) a s t h e e s s e n t i a l p a r t of language,
3) a s s e c r e t i o n from parole, .
4) a s i n d i v i d u a l [ s i c . ] f a c t ( c f FdS 's
e a r l y u s e of "aspect i n d i v i d u e l d e l a langue" f o r "parole"), 5) a s a
s o c i a l f a c t , 6) a s a p r o d u c t of t h e t i m e ( f a c t o r ) , 7) a s a s e m i o l o g i c a l
p r o d u c t , and f i n a l l y 8 ) a s t h e ( p l a c e of t h e ) combination of t h o u g h t
and sound.

37 Cf. a l s o T. P a v e l , "Une q u e s t i o n terminologique: l a p a i r e

' l a n g u e ' - 'parole"', RRLing 12:443-52 (1967), a t p. 443 ( c f . t h e i n -
troductory quotations t o 2.2).
2.2.1.3 Post-Saussurean Developments o f t h e Concepts o f
langue, parole, and langage

To Ferdinand de Saussure belongs the

merit of having drawn a t t e n t i o n t o the
d i s t i n c t i o n between "speech " and "lan-
guage", a d i s t i n c t i o n so far-reaching i n
i t s consequences t h a t i n my opinion it
can hardly f a i l , sooner or l a t e r , t o
become the indispensable basis of a l l
s c i e n t i f i c treatment of grammar.
Alan H. Gardiner i n 1933 (A[3]CIL, 3 4 5 )

Common t o a l l modern l i n g u i s t i c theory

i s the view t h a t a d i s t i n c t i o n must be
made between Zanguage i n i t s abstract
aspect and Zanguage i n i t s physical as-
pect. Some such dichotomy i s implied i n
such pairs of terms as code-message,
langue-parole, language-speech, system-
process, and metalanguage-object Zanguage.
Th.e abstract aspect i s a system of habits,
described i n terms of a s e t of signs
and rules; the physical aspect consists
o f some f i n i t e corpus of utterances
actually produced by one or more i n f o r -
mants over a given period of time.
S o l S a p o r t a i n 1961
*

We take it t h a t de Saussure ' s c l a s s i c

d i s t i n c t i o n between 'langue ' and 'parole '
i s necessary i f any sense i s t o be made
o f an area as complex as Zanguage func-
tioning.
R. J. Wales and J . C. M a r s h a l l i n 1966
t

Saussure 's Zangue/paro l e d i s t i n c t i o n , d e s p i t e a number of problems

a s s o c i a t e d w i t h i t which h e himself never r e s o l v e d , h a s proved t o b e
 one of t h e most i n f l u e n t i a l c o n c e p t s of S a u s s u r e ' s d o c t r i n e . There i s
s u f f i c i e n t e v i d e n c e i n t h e Cows t o l e a d one t o b e l i e v e t h a t S a u s s u r e ' s
'!
whole t h e o r y of language r e s t s upon h i s c o n c e p t i o n of Zangue, and t h e
f a c t t h a t t h e concept of parole and a l l i t s v a r i o u s a s p e c t s a r e c l o s e l y
r e l a t e d (though g e n e r a l l y s u b o r d i n a t e d ) t o langue i s t h e main r e a s o n f o r
t h e a t t e n t i o n t h i s d i s t i n c t i o n h a s r e c e i v e d s i n c e t h e p u b l i c a t i o n of t h e
Cows.
I n t h e e a r l y 1890s S a u s s u r e n o t e d something about t h e o b j e c t of
l i n g u i s t i c s which remained c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of h i s approach r i g h t t o t h e
end of h i s academic c a r e e r : I' . . . il y a d'abord d e s p o i n t s d e vue,
j u s t e s ou f a u x , mais uniquement d e s p o i n t s d e vue 2 l ' a i d e d e s q u e l s on
c r g e secondairement l e s c h o s e s . " (CFS 12: 5 7 f . ; c f . SM, 3 6 ) . The d i s -
c u s s i o n of t h e t o p i c i s complicated by v i r t u e of t h e f a c t t h a t , f a i t h f u l
h/
t o h i s p h i l o s o p h i c a l s t a n d p o i n t , S a u s s u r e made numerous s t a t e m e n t s a b o u t
t h e n a t u r e of language which cannot b e b r o u g h t t o g e t h e r i n t o a c o h e r e n t
whole. I n a d d i t i o n t o h i s c l a i m s about t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between Zangue
I and parole, i . e . t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between -. 1) t h e s o c i a l f a c t and t h e
individual act, 2) t h e p a s s i v e n a t u r e of t h e former b a s e d on t h e c o l -
l e c t i v i t y and t h e a c t i v e n a t u r e of t h e l a t t e r which i s dependent on t h e
i n d i v i d u a l w i l l , and 3) t h e code agreed upon by a g i v e n community and
t h e i n d i v i d u a l r e a l i z a t i o n of ( p a r t s o f ) t h i s code, t h e r e a r e i n p a r - '
t i c u l a r S a u s s u r e ' s r e p e a t e d s t a t e m e n t s about t h e s y s t e m a t i c c h a r a c t e r ; '
of l a n g u a g e , e s p e c i a l l y S a u s s u r e ' s d e f i n i t i o n of language a s a s y s t e m
1
of i n t e r d e p e n d e n t terms.
Furthermore, t h e r e l a t i o n between langue and Zangage does n o t a p p e a r
t o h a v e e v e r b e e n c l a r i f i e d by ~ a u s s u r e . ~R. S. Wells, i n h i s a t t e m p t
of 1947, which remains i n many r e s p e c t s s t i l l unsurpassed, t o a n a l y z e
t h e Cows w i t h a view t o e s t a b l i s h i n g a c o h e r e n t p i c t u r e of S a u s s u r e ' s
t h e o r y , was s a t i s f i e d w i t h a s s e r t i n g ( w i t h r e f e r e n c e t o CLG, 3 6 f . , 112)
t h a t "by d e f i n i t i o n " Zangue and parole t o g e t h e r "exhaust l e langage"
(RiL I , 9 ) l e a v i n g i t t o o t h e r s t o r e s o l v e what Zangage does r e p r e s e n t .
This problem we b e l i e v e does n o t a r i s e s o much from t h e t e r m i n o l o g i c a l
vagueness of langage ( c f . LTS, 3 0 f . ) - t h e t h e o r i s t may a f t e r a l l b e
 245

s a t i s f i e d w i t h t h e d i s m i s s a l of Zangage a s "multiforme e t h g t e r o c l i t e "

(CLG, 25) and t h e r e f o r e n o t a c c k s s i b l e t o t h e i n v e s t i g a t o r i n any system-
a t i c manner - a s from S a u s s u r e ' s a f f i r m a t i o n t h a t langue c o n s t i t u t e s
an o b j e c t of r e s e a r c h which i s no l e s s c o n c r e t e i n i t s n a t u r e t h a n p a r o l e
(CLG, 32; c f . SM, 157) .3 This apparent h e s i t a t i o n t o a t t r i b u t e t o t h e
concept of Zangue an a b s t r a c t n e s s a p p e a r s t o b e i n c o n t r a d i c t i o n t o o t h e r
claims a b o u t i t s n a t u r e i n which Zangue i s d e f i n e d a s a s y s t e m of m u t u a l l y
(inter) related signs : A s a r e s u l t , r e a d e r s of t h e C o w s have had n o t
only t o chose between Zangage, Zangue and p a r o l e o r t h e Zangue/paroZe
dichotomy ( w h i l e i g n o r i n g Zangage) b u t a l s o t o d e c i d e w h e t h e r t h e y s h o u l d
i n t e r p r e t langue a s a n a b s t r a c t system u n d e r l y i n g human speech o r a s a
c o n c r e t e m a t e r i a l a v a i l a b l e t o t h e r e s e a r c h e r i n t h e way of a sum t o t a l
4
of a l l speech u t t e r a n c e s .
A s a r u l e , we a r e s a f e i n s t a t i n g t h a t t h e r e a l impact of t h e
Cows h a s b e e n on t h o s e s c h o l a r s i n Western l i n g u i s t i c s who h a v e b e e n
concerned w i t h t h e o r y r a t h e r t h a n w i t h what T. S. Kuhn h a s termed t h e
p u z z l e - s o l v i n g o p e r a t i o n s of normal s c i e n c e ( c f . Kuhn, l 9 7 O : X f f .) .
I n o t h e r words, S a u s s u r e ' s t e a c h i n g h a s had more of a s u p e r f i c i a l impact
on what we may l o o s e l y c a l l d e s c r i p t i v e l i n g u i s t s and language prac-
t i t i o n e r s .5 By and l a r g e , i t can b e s a i d t h a t s c h o l a r s w i t h a p r e f e r e n c e
f o r a g e n e r a l t h e o r y of language ( l i k e S a u s s u r e ) have tended t o emphasize
t h e importance of Zangue and t o n e g l e c t p a r o l e , d e f i n i n g t h e former a s
1I
une e n t i t 6 purement a b s t r a i t e " and "norme s u p 6 r i e u r e aux i n d i v i d u s "
(Brdndal, 1943:93) .6
More p r a g m a t i c a l l y - i n c l i n e d l i n g u i s t s , on t h e o t h e r hand, h a v e
indeed a c c e p t e d t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between Zangue and p a r o l e b u t a t t h e
same t i m e have tended t o s t r e s s speech a t t h e expense of language.
This i s p a r t i c u l a r l y e v i d e n t from t h e work of Bloomfield, a l t h o u g h h e
echoed S a u s s u r e ' s views i n h i s e a r l i e r w r i t i n g s ( c f . H o c k e t t , 1 9 6 8 : l l f f . ) ,
and t h o s e of h i s f o l l o w e r s .7 A s i m i l a r o b s e r v a t i o n can b e made of t h e
l i n g u i s t s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e "Prague s c h o o l " who g e n e r a l l y a c c e p t e d
t h i s dichotomy making o f t e n u n c r i t i c a l u s e of t h i s d i s t i n c t i o n . 8 N. S.
Trubeckoj, i n p a r t i c u l a r , who r e p l a c e d t h e Saussurean terms by "Sprach-
g e b i l d e " and "Sprechakt" (which h e took from K. Biihler [ c f . Biihler,
1965:48ff.]), a t t e m p t e d t o d e l i n e a t e c l e a r l y two s c i e n c e s : phonology
J
whose o b j e c t i s Zangue (he s u g g e s t e d t h e t e r m "Sprachgebildelautlehre")
and p h o n e t i c s which i s concerned w i t h t h e a c o u s t i c a s w e l l a s a r t i c u l a t o r y
.
a s p e c t s of speech ( " S p r e c h a t k l a u t l e h r e " ) (cf Trubeckoj , 1967: 12f f )
9
..
It c a n b e argued, however, t h a t Trubeckoj over-emphasized this distinction
i n o r d e r t o d e t a c h h i m s e l f from t r a d i t i o n a l ( h i s t o r i c a l ) phonology and
10
t o l a y s t r e s s on h i s s y s t e m a t i c and f u n c t i o n a l approach t o phonology.
I n a d d i t i o n t o d e s c r i p t i v e l i n g u i s t s , and we have mentioned Bloom-
f i e l d and Trubeckoj a s two prominent examples of t h e more d a t a - o r i e n t a t e d
t y p e of s c h o l a r , i t h e r e a r e p s y c h o l i n g u i s t s who a l s o h a v e a c c e p t e d t h e
Saussurean d i s t i n c t i o n i n one form o r a n o t h e r , e.g. l a n g u a g e i n i t s
a b s t r a c t and p h y s i c a l a s p e c t s , o r s y s t e m v e r s u s p r o c e s s , o r , w i t h r e s p e c t
t o i t s communicative f u n c t i o n , message v e r s u s code. I n 1966 R. J. Wales
and J. C. M a r s h a l l p o i n t e d o u t once more t h e n e c e s s i t y of d i s t i n g u i s h i n g
between t h e s e two concepts,'' and T. Slama-Cazacu, f o r example, h a s r e -
c e n t l y emphasized t h e p a r t i c u l a r importance of a n a l y z i n g parole f o r
p s y c h o l i n g u i s t i c p u r p o s e s . l2 The same l i n g u i s t a l s o t r i e d t o approach
S a u s s u r e ' s trichotomy from t h e p o i n t of view of c o m m ~ n i c a t i o n . ~I n~ h i s
i n t r o d u c t o r y volume on g e n e r a l language psychology, p u b l i s h e d i n 1941,
F. Kainz i n t e r p r e t e d S a u s s u r e ' s t h r e e f o l d d i s t i n c t i o n , t o which h e added
a f o u r t h t e r m , i n t h e f o l l o w i n g manner: 1 ) Zangage i n t h e s e n s e of
f a c u l t y of speech; 2) Zangue d e n o t i n g French, E n g l i s h o r any g i v e n
language (Kainz makes u s e of Gabelentz 's term "Einzelsprache") ; 3)
parole a s s i g n i f y i n g t h e psycho-physical a c t i v i t y of s p e a k i n g , and
4 ) parZer meaning a g i v e n i n d i v i d u a l s t y l e of l i n g u i s t i c e x p r e s s i o n
(cf . Kainz, 1962: 22f .) . However, s i n c e t h e German word " ~ p r a c h e " h a s
f o u r d i s t i n c t meanings, l4 i t a p p e a r s t h a t Kainz p o s t u l a t e d t h e e x i s t e n c e
of a f o u r f o l d d i v i s i o n of terms f o r which t h e r e i s no c l e a r t h e o r e t i c a l
b a s i s . l5 By and l a r g e , Kainz 's f a r - f e t c h e d d i s t i n c t i o n s l e a d f a r away
from what S a u s s u r e had i n mind, an o b s e r v a t i o n which can b e made i n a
number of o t h e r c a s e s .
It was perhaps under t h e i n f l u e n c e of K a i n z ' s f o u r f o l d d i s t i n c t i o n
t h a t L. J o s t d i s t i n g u i s h e d f o u r forms of e x i s t e n c e ("Seinsformen") for
language. Although h e approaches t h e problem from a Humboldtian concept
++
of language b a s e d on t h e ergon v e r s u s energeia dichotomy, J o s t comes
much c l o s e r t o S a u s s u r e ' s d e f i n i t i o n s . I n t h i s i n s t a n c e , Zangage i s
d e f i n e d a s f a c u l t y of speech b u t w i t h a " v i r t u a l p s y c h i c power" ( " v i r -
t u e l l e p s y c h i s c h e Potenz"), and parole s t a n d s f o r t h e i n d i v i d u a l r e -
a l i z a t i o n of Zangage ( ! ) which c o n t a i n s , i n J o s t ' s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of
t h e term, t h e g i v e n code. ParZer i n c o n t r a s t t o Zangage i s r e g a r d e d
a s t h e i n d i v i d u a l p o s s e s s i o n of speech ("Sprachbesitz") whereas Zangue
i s d e f i n e d a s " t h e h i s t o r i c a l l y developed c o l l e c t i v e l i n g u i s t i c p r o p e r t y
a s a system of f o r m a l c a r r i e r s of p u r p o r t and means of r e l a t i o n s " ;
Zangue i s a s o c i a l f a c t and t h e sum of i n d i v i d u a l a c t u a l i z a t i o n s (par-
Zers). I n c o n t r a s t t o h i s seemingly s t a t i c d e f i n i t i o n of parler, J o s t
16
adds t h a t t h e t r u e m a n i f e s t a t i o n of language i s r e p r e s e n t e d by parler.
A s i s t h e c a s e w i t h Kainz's t h e o r i z i n g J o s t i s s a t i s f i e d w i t h o f f e r i n g
d e f i n i t i o n s of t h e v a r i o u s a s p e c t s of language w i t h o u t a t t e m p t i n g t o
a p p l y them t o t h e a n a l y s i s of l i n g u i s t i c phenomena. Kainz commits t h e
e r r o r of d e r i v i n g h i s d i s t i n c t i o n s from t h e d i v e r g e n t p o t e n t i a l u s e s
t h e s p e a k e r of German makes of t h e t e r m "Sprache" and o v e r l o o k s one
c r u c i a l a s p e c t of language, namely i t s s y s t e m a t i c o r g a n i z a t i o n . Jost,
on t h e o t h e r hand, d e f i n e s Zangue a s r e p r e s e n t i n g such a system, b u t h e
e r r o n e o u s l y m a i n t a i n s t h a t i n d i v i d u a l speech a c t u a l i z e s Zangage.
I t must b e understood t h a t b o t h s c h o l a r s were s t r o n g l y i n f l u e n c e d
by Humboldtian i d e a s t o t h e e x t e n t t h a t t h e y a t t e m p t e d t o i n t e g r a t e
Hurnboldt ' s well-known ergon/energeia d i s t i n c t i o n i n t o t h e S a u s s u r e a n
frame of thought. I n t h i s i n s t a n c e , however, i t would a p p e a r t h a t
Humboldt 's c o n c e p t s h a v e b e e n more m i s l e a d i n g t h a n u s e f u l , u n l e s s t h e y
17
can b e r e - i n t e r p r e t e d i n a non-Humboldtian s e n s e .
A s w a s t h e c a s e w i t h o t h e r l i n g u i s t s we h a v e d i s c u s s e d i n t h i s
s e c t i o n , i t can b e shown t h a t language s t a t i s t i c i a n s t o o h a v e made u s e
of S a u s s u r e ' s trichotomy i n t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n of t h e i r t h e o r e t i c a l foun-
dation. N. D. Andreev and L. R. Z i n d e r , f o r example, d i s t i n g u i s h e d
between language (langue), speech a c t (paroZe), and speech ( Zangage)
t o which t h e y thought i t a p p r o p r i a t e t o add a f o u r t h n o t i o n , i . e . that
of speech p r o b a b i l i t y , d i s t i n c t i o n s t h e y a p p e a r t o have been t h e f i r s t
t o suggest.18 i n t h e i r system Zangage i s a l s o c a l l e d speech a c t i v i t y
 VY
( i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h S c e r b a ' s suggestions)19 i n order t o contrast t h e
i n d i v i d u a l speech a c t w i t h t h e i e c o r d e d o r w r i t t e n speech m a t e r i a l .
The l a t t e r , a s opposed t o t h e i n d i v i d u a l speech a c t , c a n b e s u b j e c t t o
o b s e r v a t i o n and a n a l y s i s by d i f f e r e n t p e o p l e a t v a r i o u s t i m e s . Andreev
and Z i n d e r ' s a t t e m p t t o s e g r e g a t e speech p r o b a b i l i t y a s a f o u r t h c a t e g o r y
from hngue was c r i t i c i z e d by G . Herdan i n t h e f o l l o w i n g y e a r . Herdan
argued t h a t f i r s t l y p r o b a b i l i t i e s of o c c u r r e n c e a r e i n f a c t i n h e r e n t i n
t h e concept of Zangue, s e c o n d l y , t h a t i n S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r y o n l y Zangue
and parole a r e members of t h e b a s i c dichotomy, and f i n a l l y , t h a t t h e
( t h i r d ) concept of Zangage could b e added t o d e s i g n a t e t h e sum t o t a l
of samples (parole) which c a n b e drawn from t h e s t a t i s t i c a l u n i v e r s e
(langue).20 Herdan h i m s e l f h a s emphasized t h e v a l i d i t y of S a u s s u r e ' s
dichotomy f o r t h e language s t a t i s t i c i a n i n h i s p r o b a b i l i t y s t u d i e s
21
p u b l i s h e d s i n c e 1956. I n 1960 Herdan a d o p t e d , i n a d d i t i o n , C . S.
P e i r c e ' s l o g i c a l d i s t i n c t i o n of type v e r s u s token t o l i n g u i s t i c s t u d y ,
token b e i n g d e f i n e d as r e p r e s e n t i n g t h e i n s t a n c e of o c c u r r e n c e of a g i v e n
22 However,
u n i t whereas type d e s i g n a t e s t h e element of t h e system.
t h i s k i n d o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h e Zangue/paroZe dichotomy i s v e r y narrow
and r e s t r i c t e d t o t h e u s e of t h e s t a t i s t i c i a n whose major i n t e r e s t i s i n
word o r morpheme frequency l i s t s and s i m i l a r a c t i v i t i e s i n t h e f i e l d of
mathematical l i n g u i s t i c s and i n f a c t l e a d s f a r away from S a u s s u r e ' s
intentions.
The m a j o r i t y of post-Saussurean l i n g u i s t s whose prime c o n c e r n h a s
been w i t h t h e o r y have i n f a c t chosen t o n e g l e c t S a u s s u r e ' s c o n c e p t of L4

Zangage and t o d i r e c t t h e i r a t t e n t i o n t o t h e Zangue/paroZe dichotomy

exclusively. However, some s c h o l a r s h a v e a t t e m p t e d t o r e d e f i n e t h e tri-
chotomy by i n t r o d u c i n g a n o t h e r c o n c e p t which i n some way i s i n h e r e n t
i n S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r y y e t nowhere o v e r t l y d e f i n e d . E. Buyssens, f o r
example, i n t r o d u c e d t h e concept of discoms which h e d e f i n e d a s " l a
p a r t i e f o n c t i o n e l l e d e l a p a r o l e " and which h e wished t o p l a c e between
parole and langue which i s " l e systsme q u i r 6 g i t l a p a r o l e " and which
c o n s t i t u t e s a more o r l e s s c o h e r e n t t o t a l i t y of r u l e s followed by t h e
speaker.23 I n Buyssens' u n d e r s t a n d i n g of t h e term, parole i s t h e only
 t r u l y c o n c r e t e p a r t of speech, d i s c o u r s and Zangue b e i n g a b s t r a c t i o n s
by d e g r e e s . P a r o l e r e p r e s e n t s , ' i n a way s i m i l a r t o S a u s s u r e ' s c o n c e p t i o n ,
t h e a c t i v e s i d e of speech; we may c a l l i t u t t e r a n c e (Buyssens g i v e s no
c l e a r d e f i n i t i o n of t h e t e r m ) , whereas d i s c o u r s d e s i g n a t e s t h e cormnuni-
c a t i v e ( o r s e m i o l o g i c a l ) r e a l i z a t i o n of p a r o l e . Both a r e i n t e r d e p e n d e n t
and c a n f u n c t i o n o n l y by v i r t u e of t h e e x i s t e n c e of Zangue. Parole
w i t h o u t i t s f u n c t i o n a l a s p e c t i s n o t a n o b j e c t of l i n g u i s t i c s ; Zangue
on t h e o t h e r hand a p p e a r s t o b e t o o a b s t r a c t t o b e r e a d i l y a c c e s s i b l e t o
the investigator. T h e r e f o r e , Buyssens seems t o conclude, t h e o n l y t r u e
o b j e c t of s t u d y c a n b e discours which c o n j o i n s t h e o t h e r two c o n t r a s t i n g
f a c t o r s , and a s a consequence t h e i d e a of a l i n g u i s t i c s of p a r o l e along-
s i d e w i t h a l i n g u i s t i c s of Zangue i s t o b e r e j e c t e d . There i s no mention
of k n g a g e ( c f . Buyssens, l967:4Off .) .
We h a v e i m p l i e d more t h a n once t h a t l i n g u i s t s i n t h e post-Saussurean
e r a h a v e p l a c e d d i f f e r e n t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s upon and h a v e made d i f f e r e n t
u s e s of c o n c e p t s d e r i v i n g from t h e C o w s , and a noteworthy example i s
E. C o s e r i u . It i s perhaps t h e r e s u l t of a s u g g e s t i o n made by V . Brdndal
i n 1 9 3 9 , ~b~u t p o s s i b l y a l s o i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h H j e l m s l e v ' s d i s t i n c t i o n
sch&na ( e a r l i e r : syst2me), usage, and a c t e made i n 1 9 4 3 , ~t~h a t C o s e r i u
s u g g e s t e d i n 1952 t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between langue, p a r o l e and norm i n h i s
e s s a y "Sistema, n o r m y h a b l a " (= C o s e r i u , 1962: l l f f . ) , and h e h a s r e -
i t e r a t e d h i s views on s e v e r a l o c c a s i o n s s i n c e t h a t time.26 In fact he
r e j e c t s t h e term Zangue a s a n h i s t o r i c a l concept ( a l t h o u g h we b e l i e v e
t h a t h e h a s confused t h e language of a g i v e n community w i t h t h e S a u s s u r e a n
27
concept of langue) and r e p l a c e s i t by s y s t e m ( c f . C o s e r i u , 1970:211).
\ Coseriu r i g h t l y n o t i c e s t h a t t h e s o c i a l / i n d i v i d u a l c o n t r a s t which S a u s s u r e
\appears t o h a v e f r e q u e n t l y used t o c l a r i f y h i s Zangue/parole dichotomy
I

As m i s l e a d i n g and o b s c u r e s t h e r e l e v a n t l i n g u i s t i c a s p e c t s of t h i s d i s -
tinction. I n a d d i t i o n , i t c a n b e argued t h a t (and t h i s i s something t h a t
o t h e r s have observed) p a r o l e i s probably a s s o c i a l a s i s ~ a n ~ u wei t ,h ~ ~
t h e r e s u l t t h a t i n f a c t t h i s o p p o s i t i o n i s u n t e n a b l e ( c f . C o s e r i u , 1970:
195-9) .
Indeed C o s e r i u a r g u e s t h a t t h e Saussurean d u a l i s t i c c o n c e p t s h o u l d
b e d i s c a r d e d i n f a v o u r of a m o n i s t i c one (and t h i s i s echoed by J. R . F i r t h ,
c f . PiL, 220) which i s t o b e b a s e d on t h e c o n c r e t e f a c t of s p e e c h a c t i v i t y ,
t h e speech a c t s of t h e i n d i v i d u a l s . Language i s e s s e n t i a l l y i n t e r -
i n d i v i d u a l and c a n b e a b s t r a c t e d by t h e l i n g u i s t from t h e 'system of
i s o g l o s s e s ' ( c f . C o s e r i u , 1970:200 and 210 r e s p e c t i v e l y ) . C o s e r i u however
does n o t r e j e c t t h e langue/parole d i s t i n c t i o n e n t i r e l y b u t s e e k s t o l i n k
t h e s e two d i v e r g e n t c o n c e p t s by i n t r o d u c i n g t h e concept of norm. If
i n h i s scheme Zangue i s t o b e r e g a r d e d a s t h e f u n c t i o n a l (and " i d e a l " )
system which p e r m i t s t h e i n d i v i d u a l s p e a k e r t h e c o n c r e t e r e a l i z a t i o n of
speech, norm r e p r e s e n t s t h e a c t u a l r e a l i z a t i o n of t h e s o c i a l l y , h i s t o r i -
c a l l y and c u l t u r a l l y - m o t i v a t e d c o n v e n t i o n s i r r e s p e c t i v e of whether t h e y
a r e l i n g u i s t i c a l l y f u n c t i o n a l , parole r e p r e s e n t i n g t h e ( i n d i v i d u a l )
speech a c t i v i t y ( C o s e r i u , 1970: 79). I n f a c t i t a p p e a r s t h a t norm i s
much l e s s f l e x i b l e t h a n t h e f u n c t i o n a l system ( i . e . Zangue), t h u s a l l o w i n g
t h e i n d i v i d u a l a c e r t a i n amount of l i b e r t y . However, C o s e r i u c l a i m s t h a t
Zangue c o n t a i n s a l l t h e e s s e n t i a l and n e c e s s a r y f u n c t i o n a l o p p o s i t i o n s
and t h i s on a h i g h e r l e v e l of a b s t r a c t i o n (pp. 207-8).
On t h e o t h e r hand C o s e r i u a l s o p e r c e i v e s t h e p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t a
d i s t i n c t i o n between i n d i v i d u a l and s u b j e c t i v e and a more g e n e r a l s o c i a l "
norm s h o u l d b e made, and concedes t h a t norm i s a l s o s u b j e c t t o change
depending on t h e manner i n which t h e community i s viewed (p. 208).
C o s e r i u b e l i e v e s t h a t h i s d i s t i n c t i o n between ( t h e f u n c t i o n a l ) s y s tern and
( t h e c o n v e n t i o n a l ) norm s o l v e s t h e problem r a i s e d by t h e Saussurean
Zangue/paroZe dichotomy. D i s t i n g u i s h i n g between a ) c o n c r e t e speech
a c t i v i t y , b ) i n d i v i d u a l norm, c ) s o c i a l norm, and d) t h e f u n c t i o n a l
system of language, C o s e r i u e n v i s a g e s t h e f o l l o w i n g s o l u t i o n f o r t h e
t r a d i t i o n a l Zangue/paroZe d i s t i n c t i o n which h e e x p r e s s e s i n t h e f o l l o w i n g
diagram ( s l i g h t l y modified f o r t h e p r e s e n t purpose) :

a ) konleetes b ) individue 2- C) soziale d) funktionel-

1 Sprechen Ze Norm Norm Zes System

C o s e r i u ' s scheme a l l o w s f o r t h e f o l l o w i n g ' p o i n t s d e vues ': 1 ) I f 'system'

i s t o b e c o n t r a s t e d w i t h ' r e a l i z a t i o n ' t h e n parole c o v e r s a ) t o c ) and
 251

Zangue only d ) ; 2) i f ' c o n c r e t e ' i s t o b e c o n t r a s t e d w i t h ' a b s t r a c t ',

t h e p i c t u r e i s r e v e r s e d , a ) p e r t a i n s t o parole and b ) t o d ) a r e covered
by langue; 3) i f t h e s o c i a l a s p e c t of language i s t o b e d i s t i n g u i s h e d
from i t s i n d i v i d u a l c o u n t e r p a r t , parole would i n c l u d e t h e individual norm
whereas Zangue t h e social norm ( t o g e t h e r w i t h t h e ' f u n c t i o n a l s y s t e m ' )
( c f . C o s e r i u , 1970: 2O9f .) . Again, we n o t i c e t h a t t h e Saussurean n o t i o n
of Zangage h a s been i g n o r e d .
Where t h e t r i c h o t o m y of Zangage/Zangue/paroZe i s concerned, t h e r e
a r e o n l y a v e r y l i m i t e d number of a r t i c l e s , a l l of them w r i t t e n o v e r
t h i r t y y e a r s ago, i n which t h i s t h r e e f o l d d i s t i n c t i o n o r t h e d i s t i n c t i o n
between langue and Zangage h a s b e e n d i s c u s s e d a t some l e n g t h . 2 9 Engler
(1967:124, n. 3) n o t e d w i t h r e g r e t t h a t t h i s trichotomy h a s s o f r e q u e n t l y
been overlooked by t h e l i n g u i s t i c p u b l i c ; Sechehaye, i n h i s e s s a y "Les
t r o i s l i n g u i s t i q u e s s a u s s u r i e n n e s " of 1940, d i d s u g g e s t a " l i n g u i s t i q u e
d e l a p a r o l e o r g a n i s 6 e ou du fonctionnement d e l a langue" ( a p a r t from a
l i n g u i s t i q u e s t a t i q u e " and a " l i n g u i s t i q u e 6 v o l u t i v e " ) b u t n o t , f o r
11

30
example, a l i n g u i s t i c s of Zangage.
I t i s t r u e t h a t t h e l a r g e m a j o r i t y of l i n g u i s t s who h a v e e v e r v e n t u r e d
t o d i s c u s s Saussure's d i s t i n c t i o n have confined t h e i r a n a l y s i s t o t h e
dichotomy of Zangue v e r s u s parole. T h e i r r e s u l t s h a v e n e v e r t h e l e s s been
f a r from i d e n t i c a l ; t h i s may b e p a r t l y due t o c e r t a i n u n r e c o n c i l a b l e
p o s i t i o n s t a k e n i n t h e Cours b u t mainly, we b e l i e v e , t o t h e d i v e r g e n t
backgrounds, i n t e r e s t s , and p e r s u a s i o n s of t h e s c h o l a r s i n q u e s t i o n .
It is perhaps n o t w i t h o u t a c e r t a i n wry humour t h a t , i n 1957, N. C. W.
31
Spence c a l l e d t h i s dichotomy "a h a r d y p e r e n n i a l " , and t h e r e a r e v a r i o u s
i n d i c a t i o n s t h a t t h i s dictum s t i l l a p p l i e s t o t h e p r e s e n t s t a t e of a f f a i r s .
Another l i n g u i s t who h a s e x p l o i t e d Saussurean c o n c e p t s somewhat
d i f f e r e n t l y i s t h e l a t e Louis Hjelmslev; i n h i s a r t i c l e w r i t t e n e a r l y
i n 1943, Hjelmslev s u b j e c t e d d i v e r s p a s s a g e s i n t h e Cours d e a l i n g w i t h
t h i s p a r t i c u l a r dichotomy t o a c l o s e a n a l y s i s . 32 H j elmslev envisaged
t h e p o s s i b i l i t y of d i s t i n g u i s h i n g between t h r e e c o n c e p t i o n s of langue :
1 ) a s a forme pure, independent of i t s s o c i a l r e a l i z a t i o n and i t s m a t e r i a l
m a n i f e s t a t i o n , which h e c a l l s sch6ma; 2) a s a forme mat6rielZe, i .e.
a c t u a l i z a t i o n of t h e s o c i a l a s p e c t of language b u t s t i l l independent of
t h e d e t a i l s of i t s m a n i f e s t a t i o n , which h e c a l l s norme, and 3) a s a
s i m p l e ensemble des habitudes, i d o p t e d by a g i v e n speech community and
d e f i n e d through t h e m a n i f e s t a t i o n s a s observed, and t h i s h e terms usage.
Hjelmslev argued t h a t most of t h e d e f i n i t i o n s of Zangue i n t h e Cours
p o i n t towards i n t e r p r e t i n g i t i n t h e s e n s e of schzma; t h i s i s e v i d e n t
from t h o s e passages i n which Zangue i s c h a r a c t e r i z e d a s an e n t i t y t o which
t h e m a t e r i a l a s p e c t i s t o t a l l y secondary ( c f . CLG(E), 21, 53, 91-2, 266-7).
And i t i s p r e c i s e l y b e c a u s e of h i s t h e o r e t i c a l b i a s t h a t Hjelmslev was
l o o k i n g f o r a h i g h l y f o r m a l i z e d concept of Zangue. I n t h i s respect
S a u s s u r e ' s f r e q u e n t comparison of Zangue and i t s mechanism w i t h a game
of c h e s s ( c f . CLG(E), 64, 195-8, 249, 303) a s w e l l a s h i s comparison
of a l i n g u i s t i c u n i t w i t h a p i e c e of money which i s exchangeable w i t h
a n o t h e r u n i t of t h e same ' v a l u e ' ( c f . CLG(E), 260, 267) s e r v e d t o under-
s c o r e t h e formal n a t u r e of t h i s concept which was i n f a c t e x p r e s s e d by
S a u s s u r e i n h i s a f f i r m a t i o n t h a t Zangue i s , i n i t s e s s e n c e , a form and
34
n o t a substance ( c f . CLG(E), 254, 276).
Moreover, Hjelmslev was aware of t h e f a c t t h a t o t h e r p a s s a g e s i n
t h e Cow's might p e r m i t o t h e r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s of t h e concept t h e r e b y
r e n d e r i n g i t more c o n c r e t e i n n a t u r e ( c f . CLG(E), 44, 9 2 ) , p a s s a g e s which
35
Hjelmslev wished t o a s s o c i a t e w i t h terms such a s norm and usage.
He p o i n t e d o u t , on t h e o t h e r hand, t h a t a l l d e f i n i t i o n s ( e x c e p t p r o b a b l y
t h e one which c a l l s language a s o c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n and a s o c i a l f a c t )
a g r e e on t h e d e s i g n a t i o n of language a s a system of s i g n s . In the
subsequent p a r a g r a p h s of h i s d i s c u s s i o n Hjelmslev c o n f r o n t e d t h e t h r e e
i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s of Zangue w i t h parole, t h e i n d i v i d u a l speech a c t . After
h a v i n g argued t h a t usage and parole a r e i n t e r d e p e n d e n t b u t norme n o t h i n g
b u t a n a r t i f i c i a l c o n s t r u c t i o n d e r i v e d from t h e s e two, h e d i s m i s s e s t h e
concept of norm a s a f i c t i o n and a s redundant. The ' e x & u t i o n l of t h e
schZma, however, f i n d s i t s e x p r e s s i o n i n usage which may b e of e i t h e r
i n d i v i d u a l o r s o c i a l usage. 36 The e s s e n t i a l and ( i n H j e l m s l e v ' s views)
new a s p e c t of langue l i e s i n what h e termed sch6ma, and usage i s t o
r e p l a c e t h e Saussurean term of p a r o ~ e37
. I n h i s Prolegomena, H j e l m s l e v
m a i n t a i n e d h i s views ( c f . PTL, 75-84) t h a t Zangue i s a form, t h e c o n s t a n t
i n a manifestation, i.e. t h e 'linguistic schema, and c a l l e d a s u b s t a n c e
which m a n i f e s t s such a l i n g u i s t i c schema a 'linguistic usage (PTL, 1 0 6 ) .
A s i s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of H j e l m s l e v ' s view of language, n o t o n l y i s t h e
concept of parole f o r m a l i z e d i n a more r i g o r o u s manner t h a n i n t h e Cours
and t h e Saussurean term d e l e t e d from h i s l i n g u i s t i c terminology, b u t
38
i t i s a l s o a p p l i e d t o t h e t r e a t m e n t of langue. Langue, i n h i s system,
L
''
i n c o n t r a s t t o S a u s s u r e ' s t e a c h i n g ( c f . CLG, 3 2 ) , t e n d s t o become a
completely a b s t r a c t and f o r m a l system of r e l a t i o n s , and, i n agreement
w i t h S a u s s u r e ' s l i n g u i s t i c t h o u g h t , t h e c e n t r a l o b j e c t of l i n g u i s t i c
39
t h e o r y ( c f . PTL, 101-16).
The most i n f l u e n t i a l r e - i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of S a u s s u r e ' s Zangue/parole
d i s t i n c t i o n h a s been N. Chomsky's p r o p o s a l w i t h i n t h e framework of
t r a n s f o r m a t i o n a l - g e n e r a t i v e grammar. On e a r l i e r o c c a s i o n s we h a v e d e n i e d
t h e i n f l u e n c e on S a u s s u r e of Humboldtian i d e a s about t h e n a t u r e of
language ( c f . 1.3.4, and i t s s u b s e c t i o n s , and 2.2.1.1), s i n c e we b e l i e v e
t h a t S a u s s u r e followed t h e C a r t e s i a n t r a d i t i o n of grammaire g6n&aZe
w i t h i t s u n d e r l y i n g r a t i o n a l i s m and probably Hegelian philosophy a s w e l l
a s a number of p a r t i c u l a r l i n g u i s t i c t r e n d s c u r r e n t a t t h e end of t h e
19th century. Chomsky, on t h e o t h e r hand, h a s a t t e m p t e d t o r e v i t a l i z e
Humboldtian l i n g u i s t i c t h o u g h t , b u t we a r e i n c l i n e d t o t h i n k t h a t t h e
appearance of t h e E n g l i s h t r a n s l a t i o n of t h e Cours i n 1959 induced him
t o f a m i l i a r i z e h i m s e l f w i t h S a u s s u r e ' s c o n c e p t s , a s a r e s u l t of which a
second s t a g e i n Chomsky's l i n g u i s t i c argument was announced a t t h e Ninth
40
I n t e r n a t i o n a l Congress of L i n g u i s t s i n 1962.
It was t h e n t h a t Chomsky a s s e r t e d t h a t t h e generative g r m a r " i n t e r -
"
n a l i z e d by someone who h a s a c q u i r e d a language d e f i n e s what i n S a u s s u r i a n
terms we may c a l l langue" ( s . Chomsky, 1964:lO) adding t h a t S a u s s u r e
( l i k e S a p i r f o r i n s t a n c e ) had emphasized t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between what
Chomsky terms man's i n t r i n s i c l i n g u i s t i c competence and t h e a c t u a l per-
formance i n a g i v e n speech a c t . Furthermore, Chomsky p o i n t e d o u t t h a t
S a u s s u r e ' s assumption of t h e l o g i c a l p r i o r i t y of t h e s t u d y of langue
11
seems q u i t e i n e s c a p a b l e " (1964: 11)
41
.
However, i n Chomsky 's views,
S a u s s u r e ' s approach t o language a n a l y s i s w i t h i t s a p p a r e n t emphasis on
c l a s s i f i c a t i o n and i t s r e l i a n c e on p r o c e d u r e s of s e g m e n t a t i o n h a s t o b e
c r i t i c i z e d a s "taxonomic" and e d s e n t i a l l y " a t o m i s t i c " ( i b i d . ) . Moreover,
Chomsky h a s s t r e s s e d s i n c e t h a t t i m e t h e c r e a t i v e a s p e c t of language. v

This p r o p e r t y of language however i s n o t something which h e had d e r i v e d

from S a u s s u r e b u t , a s is w e l l known i n t h e l i t e r a t u r e , t h e main s o u r c e
of Chomsky 's i n s p i r a t i o n i s (by h i s own admission) Humboldt 's dictum
t h a t language i s n o t s o much a n e r g o n b u t a " g e n e r a t i v e " a c t i v i t y ,
42
energeia. Chomsky's c l a i m , however, t h a t S a u s s u r e r e g a r d e d Zangue
I1
a s b a s i c a l l y a s t o r e of s i g n s w i t h t h e i r grammatical p r o p e r t i e s " and
I I as an i n v e n t o r y of elements" (Chomsky, 1 9 6 4 : 2 3 1 ~i~ s n o t completely
i
j u s t i f i e d a l t h o u g h h e i s c o r r e c t i n s a y i n g t h a t 'modern l i n g u i s t i c s '
h a s b e e n much more preoccupied w i t h systems of elements t h a n w i t h systems
of r u l e s ( i b i d . ) .
Again, when, i n h i s Aspects of 1965, Chomsky emphasized t h e importance
of t h e fundamental d i s t i n c t i o n between "competence ( t h e s p e a k e r - h e a r e r ' s
knowledge of h i s language) and performance ( t h e a c t u a l u s e of language
i n c o n c r e t e s i t u a t i o n s ) " , h e acknowledges t h a t t h i s d i s t i n c t i o n i s
L
r e l a t e d t o S a u s s u r e ' s Zangue/paroZe dichotomy emphasizing, however,
t h e n e c e s s i t y of r e g a r d i n g Zangue i n t h e l i g h t of " t h e Humboldtian
c o n c e p t i o n of u n d e r l y i n g competence a s a system of g e n e r a t i v e p r o c e s s e s . "
(Chomsky, 1964:4) .44 We a r e convinced t h a t h i s t o r y w i l l show t h a t t h e
s u c c e s s of Chomsky's t h e o r i e s c a n o n l y p a r t l y b e e x p l a i n e d by h i s e f f e c t i v e
f u s i o n of Humboldtian language philosophy w i t h Saussurean l i n g u i s t i c
c o n c e p t s and t h a t s u r e l y Chomsky l i k e S a u s s u r e h a s t o b e t r e a t e d as a
s o c i a l phenomenon.
I n our above account we h a v e t r i e d t o show what we c o n s i d e r t o b e
t h e main l i n e s of t h e post-Saussurean development of t h e Zangue/paroZe
d i s t i n c t i o n and t h e Zangue/paroZe/Zangage trichotomy. One of S a u s s u r e ' s
45
c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s was undoubtedly h i s p r e d i l e c t i o n f o r dichotomies,
and i t i s n o t w i t h o u t s i g n i f i c a n c e t h a t most of h i s s u c c e s s o r s i n t h e
v a r i o u s b r a n c h e s of language s t u d y who a r e themselves t h e o r e t i c a l l y
i n c l i n e d have chosen t o d i s t i n g u i s h between two fundamental a s p e c t s of
language. Apart from t h e dichotomies mentioned i n t h i s c h a p t e r (e.g.
schzma and usage, 'language of chance' v s . 'language of c h o i c e ' , code
v s . message, t y p e v s . token, and competence v s . performance) and a number
of t r i c h o t o m i e s (e.g. discours o r norm added t o t h e Saussurean dichotomy)
s e v e r a l f u r t h e r d i s t i n c t i o n s which have been s u g g e s t e d i n r e c e n t y e a r s
c o u l d b e added t o t h e l i s t ( e . g . h a b i t s v s . b e h a v i o u r , s i g n - d e s i g n v s .
sign-event). I t i s t h e r e f o r e n o t s u r p r i s i n g t h a t , i n view of t h e v a r i o u s
i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s of S a u s s u r e ' s Zangue/paroZe c o n t r a s t , G. B ~ Sh a s r e c e n t l y
46
d i s t i n g u i s h e d between f o u r k i n d s of langue and a s many c o n c e p t s of parole.
These a r e some of t h e r e a s o n s which w i l l s e r v e t o account f o r our b e l i e f
t h a t S a u s s u r e ' s d i s t i n c t i o n h a s become s o deeply r o o t e d i n modern l i n -
guist i c s t h a t i t is v i r t u a l l y impossible t o t h e o r i z e without reference
47
i n some way t o t h e dichotomy of langue v e r s u s parole.
 FOOTNOTES 2.2.1.3

* Preface t o S o l S a p o r t a ( e d . ) , PsychoZinguistics: A Book of Readings

(New York: H o l t , R i n e h a r t & Winston, 1 9 6 1 ) , p. v.

'Roger J . Wales and John C. M a r s h a l l , "The O r g a n i s a t i o n of L i n g u i s -

t i c Performance", Psycholinguistic Papers: Proceedings of the 1966 Edin-
burgh Conference on PsychoZinguistics ed. by John Lyons and R. J . Wales
(Edinburgh: Edinburgh Univ. P r e s s , 1 9 6 6 ) , 29-80, a t p. 29.

Cf. t h e f o l l o w i n g d e f i n i t i o n s : langue a s "un s y s t s m e d e s i g n e s "

(CLG, 32; CLG(E), 43); "la l a n g u e est un systsme d e s i g n e s r e p o s a n t s u r
l ' i m a g e a c o u s t i q u e / d e s images a c o u s t i q u e s " (CLG(E), 46); l a n g u a g e a s a
11s y s t s m e q u i n f a d m e t / n e conna?t que son o r d r e p r o p r e " (CLG, ~ ~ / c L G ( E ) ,
6 4 ) , "un s y s t & e [ d e s i g n e s ] a r b i t r a i r e [ s I 1 ' (CLG, ~ O ~ / C L G ( E1)6, 3 ) ,
I1
un s y s t s m e d e p u r e s v a l e u r s " (CLG, 116; CLG(E), 1 7 8 ) , e t c . See a l s o
CLG, 1 2 4 / c L G ( ~ ) , 192; CLG, 182/CLG(E), 301, and CLG, ~ ~ ~ / c L G ( 304. E),

Cf. T. P a v e l , "Une q u e s t i o n terminologique: La p a i r e ' l a n g u e 1

e t 'parole"', RRLing 12:443-52 (1967), esp. pp. 445-8, f o r a s i m i l a r
view.

The p a s s a g e i n t h e CLG f o l l o w s t h e s t u d e n t s ' n o t e s v e r y c l o s e l y

which s t a t e : "Dans l a l a n g u e (on a ) /nous avons un o b j e t ( f a i t ) d e n a t u r e
concrste ... " (CLG(E), 4 4 ) .
R. S. W e l l s ' s u g g e s t i o n t h a t FdS1s emphasis on t h e c o n c r e t e n a t u r e
of langue h a s t o b e viewed a s a r e a c t i o n a g a i n s t (Wells s p e a k s o n l y of
11
a c r i t i q u e of") t h e neogramrnarians who tended t o r e g a r d l i n g u i s t i c
elements a s n o t h i n g b u t a b s t r a c t i o n s ( c f . CLG, 252-3) i s probably c o r r e c t .
A s t h e CLG(E), 44 r e v e a l s FdS d i d n o t mean ' c o n c r e t e ' i n any m a t e r i a l
sense; l i n g u i s t i c s i g n s , h e h e l d , a r e not a b s t r a c t f o r they have a
psychical r e a l i t y .

For a r e c e n t d i s c u s s i o n of t h e s e terms and t h e v a r i o u s l i n g u i s t i c

d i s c i p l i n e s , s e e Hans J. ~ e r m e e r ' s ( a t times r a t h e r i d i o s y n c r a t i c )
Einfiihrung i n die Zinguistische TerrninoZogie ( D a m t a d t : Wiss ens c h a f t -
.
l i c h e B u c h g e s e l l s c h a f t , 19 71) , 23f f

C f . t h e works of A. S. Fikobava, Problema jazyka kak predmeta

i z , , 8 4 f f . ; L. G e s c h i e r e i n Nph
jazykoznani ja (Moscow: ~ z ~ e d i ~ 1959)
45: 21-37 (1961), and 46: 201-10 (1962) ; hi& H a t t o r i , "Saussure no
Zangue t o Gengokateisetsu", GK 32:l-41 (1957).
 Cf. B l o o m f i e l d ' s dictum: "In p r i n c i p l e , t h e s t u d e n t of language
i s concerned o n l y w i t h t h e actu'al speech" (1933:74). For a n overview
of l i n g u i s t i c development i n North America from 1925 t o t h e e a r l y 1960s
w i t h r e g a r d t o t h i s dichotomy, s e e S. R . Levin, "Langue and p a r o l e i n
American L i n g u i s t i c s " , FL 1:83-94 (1965).

This o c c u r r e d d e s p i t e t h e warning of one of i t s members who

found t h e S ~ u s s u r e a nd e f i n i t i o n s q u i t e u n s a t i s f a c t o r y and m i s l e a d i n g ;
s. J. M. Korinek, "Einige Betrachtungen iiber Sprache und Sprechen",
TCLP 6: 23-8 (1936) .
Cf. H. F r e i ' s c r i t i c i s m of Trubeckoj 's argument i n "Langue, p a r o l e
e t d i f f g r e n t i a t i o n " , JPs 45:137-57 (1952), a t p. 157, and e s p e c i a l l y
t h e e a r l i e r c r i t i q u e s b y N. van Wijk, "La d g l i m i t a t i o n d e s domaines de l a
phonologie et d e l a phon6tique", P[3]ICPS, 8-12 (1939), and G. L a z i c z i u s ,
" D i e Scheidung langue - p a r o l e i n d e r Lautforschung", i b i d . , 13-23;
r e p r . i n Phonometrie 11, 178-89 (1968).

lo V. ~ k a l i r k a ,a n o t h e r member of t h e Prague C i r c l e , a t t e m p t e d a s
e a r l y as 1937 t o g r a n t t o p a r o l e a s t a t u s comparable t o t h a t of Zangue
.
(cf h i s a r t i c l e , "Promluva j a k o l i n g u i s t i c k ? poj em", SaS 3: 163-6 [ 19371) ,
views which h e r e i t e r a t e d many y e a r s l a t e r ; c f . h i s p a p e r , "The Need
f o r a L i n g u i s t i c s of Za parole", Prague School Reader, 375-90.

l1 Cf . the q u o t a t i o n a t t h e b e g i n n i n g of t h i s c h a p t e r (2.2 .l.3 ) .

l2 Cf. "La mgthode d e l a p s y c h o l i n g u i s t i q u e e t l ' g t u d e d e l a p a r o l e " ,

A[lO]CIL 111, 217-22 (1970). Some l i n g u i s t s , f o r i n s t a n c e J. L. P i e r s o n ,
m a i n t a i n e d t h a t s t y l e a s "a t y p i c a l l y i n d i v i d u a l q u a l i t y , s h o u l d exclu-
s i v e l y b e l o n g t o Parole". .
Cf h i s p a p e r , "Three L i n g u i s t i c Problems1',
SL 7:l-16 (1953), a t p. 1.

.
l3 Cf T. Slama-Cazacu, "Elementele comunic&ii, n i v e l u r i a l e
c o d o l u i , ~i Zimbajul - Zirnba - v o r b i r e a " , SCL 20:605-15 (1969).

l4 I n a s i m i l a r way, E. Winkler, i n h i s a r t i c l e , "Vom sprachwissen-

s c h a f t l i c h e n Denken d e r Franzosen: Zur F r a g e d e r V o r a u s s e t z u n g s l o s i g k e i t
d e r Wissenschaft", WuS 19:45-51, 81-93 (1938), a t p. 48, t h o u g h t t h a t
FdS f e l t t h e n e c e s s i t y f o r d i s t i n g u i s h i n g t h r e e terms s i n c e t h e French
language f u r n i s h e s Zangue, p a r o l e , and Zangage, terms f o r which most o t h e r
languages h a v e no e x a c t e q u i v a l e n t s ( c f . De Mauro, 1968:389-92, f o r
t r a n s l . i n t o a dozen f o r e i g n l a n g u a g e s ) .

l5 Kainz (1962: 22-3) i l l u s t r a t e d h i s q u a d r u p l e d i s t i n c t i o n w i t h t h e

f o l l o w i n g examples: 1 ) "Die Sprache i s t e i n a u s g e z e i c h n e t e s Merkmal
d e s Menschen" ( [ f a c u l t 6 d u ] Zangage); 2) " ... d i e deutsche, e n g l i s c h e
oder f r a n z a s i s c h e Sprache" (Zangue); 3 ) "Er h a t i n f o l g e e i n e s Schlagan-
f a l l s d i e Sprache v e r l o r e n " ( p a r o l e ) - we b e l i e v e t h a t "Sprache" i n t h i s
example could a l s o b e i n t e r p r e t e d a s k n g a g e ( 1 ) ; 4) " ~ e s s i n gf i i h r t
a l s K r i t i k e r e i n e s c h a r f e Sprache" ( p a r l e r ) . The f a c t t h a t Kainz d i d
n o t make t h e o r e t i c a l u s e of t h i s f o u r f o l d d i v i s i o n of terms i n h i s subse-
quent argument u n d e r s c o r e s , we b e l i e v e , t h e a r t i f i c i a l i t y of h i s d i s -
tinction.
 l6 See Leonhard J o s t , Sprache a l s Werk und wirkende Kraft: Ein
Beitrag zur Geschichte der energetischen Sprachauffassung s e i t WiZhelm
von HwnboZdt (Berne: P. Haupt, 1960), e s p . p. 183.
l7 It i s d o u b t f u l t h a t H. G. K o l l ' s s u g g e s t i o n s c o n c e r n i n g t h e
e s t a b l i s h m e n t of langue would l e a d t o any l i n g u i s t i c a l l y v e r i f i a b l e
and u s e f u l r e s u l t s ; s . h i s p a p e r , "Comment p a r v e n i r 2 une c a r a c t g r i s a t i o n
i n t g g r a l e d'une langue, en t a n t que s y s t s m e '02 t o u t s e t i e n t ' ? " , A [ l O ] C I L
111, 521-9 (1970); d i s c u s s i o n i b i d . , 329f.

l8We r e f e r t o t h e E. t r a n s l . of t h e i r p a p e r which f i r s t appeared

i n VJa 12.3: 15-21 ( l 9 6 3 ) , "on t h e Notions of t h e Speech Act, Speech,
Speech P r o b a b i l i t y , and Language", Linguistics 4:5-13 (1964), e s p . pp.
6 and 10.

l9 Andreev and Zinder make e x p l i c i t r e f e r e n c e t o L. V. S z e r b a ' s

programmatic paper of 1931, "0 trojakom a s p e c t e jazykovyx j a v l e n i j i
ob Sksperimente v j a z y k o z n a n i i " , now r e p r . i n Zvegincev. 1965:361-73.

20 See Herdan's a t t a c k o f Andreev and Zinder, "On Communication

between L i n g u i s t s " , Linguistics 9:71-6 (1964), esp. pp. 7 3 f . N. D .
Andreev h a s s i n c e modified h i s views; s . h i s p a p e r , "Sistema r e c i i
s t a t i s t i k c - k o m b i n a t o r n o e m o d e l i r o v a n i e jazykov", A [ I O ] C I L I , 451-2
(1969); c f . summary i n R C [ l O ] C I L , 1 2 f . (1967).

.
21 Cf Herdan, Language as Choice and Chance (Groningen: P . Noord-
h o f f , l 9 5 6 ) , i n p a r t i c u l a r pp. 3, 4, and 168.
22
S. Type - Token Mathematics (The Hague: Mouton, 1 9 6 0 ) , b u t a l s o
Herdan's f i n a l e x p r e s s i o n of h i s t h e o r y a s a whole i n The Advanced
Theory of Language as Choice and Chance ( B e r l i n & New York: S p r i n g e r ,
1966), e s p . pp. 3-4, 7, 13, 27-8, and 322. On p. 7 Herdan a f f i r m e d :
'I
The 'language a s c h o i c e ' - 'language a s chance' dichotomy w i l l b e
found e q u a l l y u s e f u l a s were t h e ' l a n g u e - p a r o l e ' and [ s i c . ] t h e ' s i g n i -
f i a n t ' - ' s i g n i f i g l dichotomies ." I n f a c t Herdan hopes t o b r i d g e
t h e s e two Saussurean dichotomies by i n t e r p r e t i n g 'language a s chance'
a s t h e a s p e c t which d i s t i n g u i s h e s between " s t a t i s t i c a l u n i v e r s e " and
1'
sample" and 'language a s c h o i c e ' " r e f e r s t o t h e s i g n i f i a n t - s i g n i f i 6
dichotomy i n i t s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n a s b e i n g s u b j e c t t o t h e law of d u a l i t y . "
( a i d . ) . Cf. a l s o L. Heilmann, " C o n s i d e r a z i o n i s t a t i s t i c o - m a t e m a t i c h e
e c o n t e n u t o semanticof', QUCC 7:35-45 (1962/63), and G. Herdan, "The J i g -
Saw P u z z l e of S a u s s u r i a n and Q u a n t i t a t i v e L i n g u i s t i c s " , LeSt 4:69-76
( l 9 6 9 ) , e s p . pp. 73-4.

23 "De l ' a b s t r a i t e t du c o n c r e t dans l e s f a i t s l i n g u i s t i q u e s : La

p a r o l e - l e s d i s c o u r s - l a langue", AL 3: 17-23 (1942/43), a t p. 21.
The d e f i n i t i o n of discours was i n c l u d e d i n Buyssens' Les Zangages e t
Ze discours ( B r u s s e l s : O f f i c e de l a ~ u b l i c i t 6 ,1943), p. 30. In his
book of 1967 Buyssens d i s t i n g u i s h e d between parole and discours a s f o l l o w s :
I'
S i p a r parole on entend l e l o t s o n o r e s o r t a n t d e l a bouche du l o c u t e u r ,
il e s t g v i d e n t q u ' i l f a u t un a u t r e terme pour d g s i g n e r l a s u c c e s s i o n
d e s phonsmes a i n s i que d e t o u s l e s a u t r e s glgments q u i a s s u r e n t l a
communication; nous l ' a p p e l l e r o n s discours" (1967:40). He t h e n r e -
i t e r a t e s h i s e a r l i e r d e f i n i t i o n of d i s c o u r s e (Buyssens, 1967:42).

24 "A propos d e l a d i s t i n c t i o n e n t r e langue e t p a r o l e on s e demande

souvent q u e l l e e s t , s o u s c e r a p p o r t , l a p o s i t i o n d e 1'Usage [ s i c . ] .
On p e u t a d m e t t r e c e t t e n o t i o n comme en quelque s o r t e i n t e r m g d i a i r e
e n t r e langue e t p a r o l e ... 'I (Brdndal, 1943:96).

25 Cf. Hjelmslev's p a p e r , " ~ a n g u ee t p a r o l e " , CFS 2:29-44 (1942

[1943]); r e p r . i n Hjelmslev, 1959:69-81. Note t h a t Hjelmslev (pp. 7 9 f f . )
r e j e c t e d t h e concept of 'norm' a s a n a r t i f i c i a l c o n s t r u c t i o n and a s
redundant.

26 Cf. t h e f o l l o w i n g d e f i n i t i o n s of h i s terms i n Sincron-la, diacronia

e h i s t o r i a : "El s i s t e m a e s ' s i s t e m a d e p o s i b i l i d a d e s , d e c o o r d i n a d e s
que i n d i c a n 10s caminos a b i e r t o s y 10s caminos c e r r a d o s ' d e un h a b l a r
'comprensible' en una comunidad; l a norma, e n cambio, es un s i s t e m a d e
realizaciones obligadas ... , consagradas s o c i a l y c u l t u r a m e n t e : no
corresponde a l o que 'puede d e c i r s e ' s i n 0 a l o que 'se h a d i c h o ' y
t r a d i c i o n a l m e n t e ' s e d i c e ' en l a comunidad considerada." ( C o s e r i u , 1958:31).

27 We b a s e o u r a n a l y s i s of C o s e r i u ' s views on h i s r e c e n t a r t i c l e ,
II
sistema, norma e 'parola"', Studi Zinguistiei i n onore d i V i t t o r e Pisani
ed. by G i a n c a r l o Bolognesi e t a l . (Brescia: P a i d e i a , l 9 6 9 ) , v o l . I,
235-53, G. t r a n s l . i n C o s e r i u , 1970:193-212. C o s e r i u ' s c o n c e p t of "norma"
h a s r e c e n t l y been d i s c u s s e d by a number of l i n g u i s t s ; e.g. I. Cotenu,
'1
Dicotomie s a n t r i c o t o m i e l i n g v i s t i c z ? Limba - v o r b i r e - nor$", Ornagiu
Rosetti (1965[1966]), 153 f . ; S. M. B i g o r r a , " S i n t a x i s d e l a lengua y
s i n t a x i s d e l a norma", ProbZemas y principios, 135-47 (1967) ; I.
11
~h%lz,
Note d e s p r e c o n c e p t u l d e 'norma l i n g u i s t i c a " ' , LbR 12:325-34 (1963),
and S. J z g e r , "Zum Problem d e r s p r a c h l i c h e n Norm und s e i n e r Relevanz
f;r d i e Schule", Muttersprache 81: 162-75 (1971), e s p . pp. l7Of f .
28 A. H. Gardiner i n h i s book, !The Theory of Speech and Language
(Oxford: Clarendon, 1931; 2nd e d . , 1 9 5 1 ) , e s p . pp. 1 0 6 f f . , and 0. J e s p e r -
s o n , Mankind, Nation and Individual (London: A l l e n & Unwin, 1946; r e p r .
1954), l O f f . , f o r i n s t a n c e , p l a c e d t h e s o c i a l f a c t o r i n language o v e r
and above t h e i n d i v i d u a l and h i s l i n g u i s t i c e x p r e s s i o n . J e s p e r s o n ' s
p o s i t i o n was c r i t i c i z e d by C. W. B a l l y i n h i s a r t i c l e , "Langue e t p a r o l e " ,
JPs 23: 693-701 (1926) .
29 See E. Swirner, "Langue e t l a n g a g e en phonom6trie", ~ z l a n g e s
Boisacq (1938) , 391-4; r e p r . Phonometrie 11, 9 5-8 (1968) ; J
1'
. Przyluski ,
L e langage, l a l a n g u e e t l a p a r o l e " , JPs 37:29-38 (1940/41); W. L.
Thieme, Spraak, tau2 en rede: Proeve eener redeZijke ontwikkling van
het taalbegrip (Bussum: Van Dishoek, 1 9 4 1 ) . An e x c e p t i o n i s T. P a v e l ' s
paper r e f e r r e d t o i n n o t e 2 of t h i s chap. R e c e n t l y , L. T a r n o c z i (1970:83)
p r a i s i n g C o s e r i u ' s t r i p a r t i t e d i s t i n c t i o n between ' s y s t e m ' , 'norm', and
 ' u s a g e ' (which h e t a k e s a s ' t h e b e s t s o l u t i o n t o t h e problem and s u p e r i o r
t o G. Guillaume's d i s t i n c t i o n between Zangue, p a r o l e , and d i s c o u r s ) h a s
made a s u r p r i s i n g c l a i m when h e s t a t e s t h a t S a u s s u r e d i s t i n g u i s h e d o n l y
between "NORME ( l a n g u e s o c i a l e ) e t USAGE ( l a n g u e i n d i v i d u e l l e ) " , a
c o n t e n t i o n which s u g g e s t s t h e a u t h o r ' s l i m i t e d f a m i l i a r i t y w i t h t h e
Cows, major components of which h i s t r e a t i s e s e t s o u t t o c r i t i c i z e .

.
30 VR 5 :1-48 (1940) ; r e p r i n Geneva S c h o o l Reader, 138-81 (19 6 9 ) .
Engler ' s f o r m u l a t i o n "neb en p a r o l e o r g a n i s g e und Zangue" seems m i s l e a d i n g
(1967:124, n. 3) i f i t i s meant t o i n d i c a t e two s e p a r a t e l i n g u i s t i c s
(as FdS s u g g e s t e d ) and n o t a s i n g l e one ( a s Sechehaye e n v i s a g e d i n t h i s
context).
31
Cf. h i s p a p e r , "A Hardy P e r e n n i a l : The D i s t i n c t i o n of La Langue
and La P a r o l e " , ArchL 9 :1-27 (1957) .
32 See r e f e r e n c e i n n o t e 7; Hjelmslev (CFS 2:44) gave t h e d a t e a s
"Mars 1943". We n o t e w i t h s u r p r i s e t h a t H. F r e i , i n h i s a t t e m p t a t
r e c o n c i l i a t i o n of a p p a r e n t c o n t r a d i c t o r y o r mutually e x c l u s i v e d e f i n i t i o n s
of t h e s e terms i n t h e CLG, makes no mention of H j e l m s l e v ' s p a p e r ; s e e
F r e i ' s "Langue, p a r o l e e t d i f f & e n t i a t i o n l ' , J P s 45: 137-57 (1952), e s p .
pp. 1 4 6 f f .

33 Quoted from Hjelmslev, 1959: 7 2 f f . ; Hjelmslev r e i t e r a t e d h i s views

concerning t h e t h r e e f o l d d i s t i n c t i o n between norme, usage, and schgma
i n h i s a r t i c l e , "La s t r a t i f i c a t i o n du langage", Word 10:163-88 (1954),
a t pp. 187-8. H j e l m s l e v ' s r e f e r e n c e t o t h e CLG have been r e p l a c e d by
t h o s e i n t h e CLG(E) wherever FdS's a u t h o r s h i p h a s been e s t a b l i s h e d .
On o t h e r o c c a s i o n s a number of r e f e r e n c e s w i l l b e added o r t h e i r authen-
t i c i t y challenged.

34 This c o n c e p t i o n of langue was developed by A. Sechehaye who

emphasized t h e a l g e b r a i c n a t u r e of Zangue i n h i s Programme e t mgthodes
de Za Z i n g u i s t i q u e t h g o r i q u e ( P a r i s : Champion; L e i p z i g : H a r r a s s o w i t z ;
Geneva: Eggimann, 1 9 0 8 ) , pp. 111, 133, 151.

35 We a g r e e w i t h H j e l m s l e v ' s o b s e r v a t i o n t h a t FdS avoided t h e u s e

of norme i n h i s l e c t u r e s b u t ( a s Hjelmslev could n o t know) we f i n d no
e v i d e n c e f o r FdS's u s e of t h e term usage (CLG, 131, 138, 173, 227 i n
c o n t r a s t t o CLG(E), 206, 223, 285, 376) which was added by t h e e d i t o r s
on a l l f o u r o c c a s i o n s .

36 Again t h e e x p r e s s i o n " h a b i t u d e ( s ) l i n g u i s t i q u e ( s ) " t o which

Hjelmslev r e f e r s i s n o t FdS 's b u t t h e e d i t o r s ' ( c f . CLG(E) , 57, 1 7 2 ) .

37 Hjelmslev (1959:81, n o t e 1 ) s u g g e s t s t h e f o l l o w i n g t r a n s l a t i o n s
of t h e s e two terms: E. ' p a t t e r n ' and ' u s a g e ' ; G. 'Sprachbau' and 'Sprach-
gebrauch' o r 'Usus ' , e t c . ( ' P a t t e r n ' and 'Usage' have probably b e e n
d e r i v e d from S a p i r ' s Language of 1921, i n which t h e a u t h o r s t a t e d :
%herever we go we a r e impressed by t h e f a c t t h a t p a t t e r n i s one t h i n g ,
t h e u t i l i z a t i o n of p a t t e r n q u i t e a n o t h e r " [S. S a p i r , 1949:59], whereas
'Sprachgebrauchl h a s been t a k e n from P a u l ' s P r i n z i p i e n ) .
 38 This term i s used once (PTL, 114) b u t n o t l i s t e d i n t h e i n d e x
I
( c f . PTL, 1 4 1 ) .

39 It may, however, b e worth i n v e s t i g a t i n g t o what e x t e n t FdS d i d

i n f a c t r e i n t r o d u c e a l i n g u i s t i c s of parole under t h e d i s g u i s e of s y n t a g -
m a t i c s ( c f . CLG, 1 7 2 f f . ) , t h e a n a l y s i s of t h e chazne parlge (CLG, 64-6,
77-9) o r o t h e r n o t i o n s , f o r i n s t a n c e t h e l i n e a r i t y of t h e signifiant
(CLG, 103, 170) .
40 We a r e n o t aware of an e x p l i c i t r e f e r e n c e t o FdS i n Chomsky's
work p r i o r t o t h i s 1962 paper ( c f . Chomsky, 1964:10f., 21, 23, 26, 67,
68, 108, and 111, n o t e , f o r r e f e r e n c e s t o FdS). Note t h a t R. S. W e l l s '
i m p o r t a n t a n a l y s i s of t h e Cows appeared i n Word 3:l-31 (1947) and n o t
i n Language, t h e organ of t h e L i n g u i s t i c S o c i e t y of America of which
Wells h a s been a member s i n c e 1944. J. T. Waterman's i n s i g n i f i c a n t
n o t e on FdS i n M W 40:307-9 (1956) c o u l d , of c o u r s e , n o t a r o u s e t h e
i n t e r e s t i n t h e CLG W e l l s ' s t u d y f a i l e d t o a c h i e v e . We b e l i e v e t h a t
Chomsky's Syntactic Structures of 1957, e x c e p t f o r i t s emphasis on s y n t a x
i n c o n t r a s t t o t h e l e v e l s of morphology and phonology which were s t u d i e d
a l m o s t e x c l u s i v e l y d u r i n g t h e p e r i o d of t h e "Bloomf i e l d i a n " e r a of
l i n g u i s t i c s , did not lead t o a l i n g u i s t i c theory s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i s -
s i m i l a r t o t h e I C a n a l y s i s p r o c e d u r e s s u g g e s t e d by R . S. Wells i n h i s
e s s a y of 1947, "Immediate C o n s t i t u e n t s " , Language 23:81-117, and subse-
quent e x p l o i t a t i o n s of t h e s e i d e a s by 2. S . H a r r i s , and o t h e r s . Q u i t e
i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h o u r c l a i m C . F. Hockett d i s r e g a r d e d t h e Syntactic
Structures and based h i s c r i t i c a l d i s s e c t i o n of Chomsky's views on t h e
Aspects of 1965 ( c f . Hockett, 1 9 6 8 : 3 8 f f . ) .
41
H. Birnbaum's s t a t e m e n t s h o u l d b e k e p t i n mind when comparing
FdS's concept w i t h Chomsky's d i s t i n c t i o n , though w i t h some r e s e r v e s
r e g a r d i n g FdS's a l l e g e d sociologism: "It was perhaps n o t e n t i r e l y
c o i n c i d e n t a l t h a t S a u s s u r e never worked o u t t h e d e t a i l s of a s y n t a c t i c
t h e o r y w i t h i n t h e framework of langue. He was v e r y much o r i e n t e d toward
s o c i o l o g y w h i l e Chomsky i s a p s y c h o l o g i s t and l o g i c i a n of l i n g u i s t i c s .
There seems t o e x i s t a c e r t a i n d i s c r e p a n c y between Zangue and parole
and 'competence' and 'performance"' (Phonologie der Gegenwart, p. 351
[l967]).

42 The key s e n t e n c e i n Humboldt's d o c t r i n e which had i t s impact

on Chomsky's argument was t h a t language "muss ...
von e n d l i c h e n M i t t e l n
unendlichen Gebrauch machen" (quoted i n Chomsky , 1964: 1 7 ) .

43 That Chomsky had been l e d t o t h i s c o n c l u s i o n by t h e E. t r a n s l .

of t h e CLG was p u t forward by H. G. Wittmann, "Two Models of L i n g u i s t i c
Mechanism", CJL 11.2: 83-93 (1966), e s p . pp. 8 5 f . Wittmann a l s o t r i e d ,
i n a somewhat i d i o s y n c r a t i c manner, t o r e i n t e r p r e t S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r y i n
t h e l i g h t of t h e t h r e e components of s y n t a x , phonology, and s e m a n t i c s of
Chomskyan l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y .
 44 It would b e i n t e r e s t i n g t o i n v e s t i g a t e how Chomsky's i d e a s
.
c o n c e r n i n g "deep" and "surf a c e " , grammar ( c f Chomsky , 1964: 1 0 ; 1965:
16-8 ( n o t e s , 220-22), and elsewhere; 1968:15)are i n f a c t r e l a t e d t o t h e
d i s t i n c t i o n between competence (Zangue) and performance ( p a r o l e ) , a
q u e s t i o n which would exceed t h e s c o p e of t h e p r e s e n t overview. Cf. a l s o
t h e somewhat c u r i o u s a c c o u n t , "Kompetenz und Performanz (Langue und
p a r o l e ) " i n H. G l i n z , L i n g u i s t i s c h e Grundbegriffe und Methodeniiberblick
( F r a n k f u r t : Athengum, 19 70; 2nd ed. , 19 7 l ) , 92-119, e s p pp 92-100. . .
45 This a s p e c t of FdS's l i n g u i s t i c thought was p o i n t e d o u t by E.
B e n v e n i s t e , "Saussure a p r & un demi-si&let', CFS 20:7-21 (1963), a t p.
16. Cf. a l s o Engler, 1966: 37.

46 S. h i s a r t i c l e , "Langue and p a r o l e " , i n M a r t i n e t ( e d . ) , 1969:

172-80, 424-5 ( n o t e s ) .

47 I n o r d e r t o u n d e r s c o r e o u r c l a i m we s h a l l l i s t o n l y t h o s e r e c e n t
p u b l i c a t i o n s which have n o t been mentioned i n our B i b l i o g r a p h i a Saussureana,
1870-1970, P a r t I, S e c t i o n 4. ( b ) and i n n o t e s 10, 26, 30, 31, 34, 35, 36,
40 a s f o l l o w s : J.-B. Fages, Comprendre Ze s t r u c t u r a l i s m e (Toulouse:
E. P r i v a t , 1967), e s p . pp. 19-21; L. Bondy, ~ Z z m e n t sde Z i n g u i s t i q u e
( P a r i s : J . B. ~ a i l l i s r e ,l 9 6 8 ) , e s p . 14-6 [Bondy's book i s deeply i n d e b t e d
t o FdS's t h e o r y b u t h e f a i l s t o mention t h e CLG! ] ; J. Veyrink, " ~ 6 r i p h 6 -
r i e l i n g u i s t i q u e e t f o n c t i o n s du langage", A[IO]CIL I , 295-8 (1969);
P a u l S c h v e i g e r , "Normal and P a t h o l o g i c a l Speech", A[IO]CIL 111, 761-6
(1970); s e e a l s o Th. E b n e t e r , "La p h r a s e dans l a domaine d e l a 'langue"',
A[lO]CIL I , 425-31 (1969); and t h e summary "La p h r a s e e t l a d i c h o t o m i e
Zangue : parole", RC[lO]CIL, p. 83 ( l 9 6 7 ) , and f i n a l l y t h e e i g h t p o i n t s
i n which E. G. Avetjan summarizes h i s d i $ c u s s i o n of t h e Saussurean
dichotomy i n h i s s t u d y , P r i r o d a Z i n v i s t i c e s k o g o znaka (Erevan: "Mitk",
l 9 6 8 ) , 89-126, a t pp. 125-6.
2.2.2 The Dichotomy of Synchrony v e r s u s Diachrony i n Language
Description

I n the early years of the present century,

Zinguistics underwent what has been r i g h t l y
described as a 'Copernican r e v o h t i o n '.
This revozution, which was ushered i n by the
pos thwnous pub Zication, i n 1916 , of Ferdinand
de Saussuxe's Cours d e l i n g u i s t i q u e g g n g r a l e ,
showed i t s e l f i n two main ways. F i r s t l y ,
the h i s t o r i c a l bias of nineteenth-century
phiZoZogy gave way t o a broader view which
aclmitted the existence of two approaches t o
Zanguage, one descriptive or 'synchronic ',
the other h i s t o r i c a l or 'diachronic', and
boldly proclaimed the primacy of the descrip-
t i v e method because it i s more akin t o the
a t t i t u d e of the ordinary speaker. The second
great change concerned the way i n which the
tasks of descriptive Zinguistics were con-
ceived. Language came t o be viewed, not as
an aggregate of discrete elements b u t as an
organized t o t a l i t y , a G e s t a l t , which has a
pattern of i t s own and whose components are
interdependent and derive t h e i r significance
from the system as a whole. I n Saussure ' s
famous simile, language i s Zike a game of
chess: you cannot add, remove or displace
any element without a f f e c t i n g the e n t i r e fieZd
of force.

Stephen Ullman i n 1958

*

2.2.2.1 A B r i e f Survey o f t h e Pre-Saussurean D i s t i n c t i o n between

D e s c r i p t i v e and H i s t o r i c a l Grammar

S. Ullman's s t a t e m e n t quoted above can b e regarded a s a t y p i c a l

e x p r e s s i o n of t h e modern s t r u c t u r a l i s t who h a s c o n c e n t r a t e d h i s s c h o l a r l y
a c t i v i t y on s y n c h r o n i c a s p e c t s of language a t t h e expense of h i s t o r i c a l
perspective. S i g n i f i c a n t l y , t h i s o b s e r v a t i o n was made n o t i n t h e t w e n t i e s
263
b u t i n t h e f i f t i e s of our c e n t u r y , some f o r t y y e a r s a f t e r t h e p u b l i c a t i o n
of t h e COUPS .' A number of r e a s b n s may account f o r t h i s . Firstly,
i n t h e 1920s, and p a r t l y a l s o i n t h e two subsequent decades, o n l y a
l i m i t e d n u d e r of l i n g u i s t s a p p r e c i a t e d t h e importance of S a u s s u r e ' s
t h e o r e t i c a l pronouncements; e s p e c i a l l y i n C e n t r a l Europe h i s t o r i c a l
l i n g u i s t i c s was t h e n s t i l l r e g a r d e d as t h e queen of l i n g u i s t i c s c i e n c e ,
a f a c t which was g e n e r a l l y t r u e of Germany and t h e German-speaking
c o u n t r i e s u n t i l t h e m i d - f i f t i e s and probably a l s o of E a s t e r n Europe,
though perhaps f o r d i f f e r e n t r e a s o n s . Secondly, few s c h o l a r s h a v e
v e n t u r e d t o r e a d a g a i n t h e s t a t e m e n t s made by l i n g u i s t s working between
1870 and 1910 r e l y i n g h e a v i l y i n s t e a d on secondary s o u r c e s , and many
have been c o n t e n t t o q u o t e i n p a r t i c u l a r from P e d e r s e n ' s a c c o u n t of
1 9 t h - c e n t u r y h i s t o r i c a l l i n g u i s t i c s (which t o t a l l y i g n o r e s t h e achieve-
ments i n g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s of Hurnboldt, S t e i n t h a l , G. von d e r Gabe-
l e n t z , Baudouin d e Courtenay, P a u l , and o t h e r s ) . T h i r d l y , Ullman's
a f f i r m a t i o n t h a t S a u s s u r e "proclaimed t h e primacy of t h e d e s c r i p t i v e
method b e c a u s e i t i s more a k i n t o t h e a t t i t u d e of t h e o r d i n a r y s p e a k e r "
invites a t l e a s t three criticisms: 1 ) S a u s s u r e never claimed t h e primacy v,

of s y n c h r o n i c l i n g u i s t i c s over t h e h i s t o r i c a l approach t o , l a n g u a g e ,
a l t h o u g h i t may w e l l h a v e been t h e i m p r e s s i o n gained by t h e r e a d e r i n
t h e 1950s who ( a ) had absorbed t h e r e - i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s of S a u s s u r e a n
i d e a s by t h e Prague and Copenhagen S c h o o l s , (b) c o n t e n t e d h i m s e l f w i t h
4
a n a c q u a i n t a n c e w i t h t h e f i r s t (and s m a l l e r ) h a l f of of t h e Corns,
5
and ( c ) perhaps o n l y i n d i r e c t l y f a m i l i a r i z e d h i m s e l f w i t h i t s c o n t e n t s ;
2) S a u s s u r e never a t t e m p t e d t o u n d e r s c o r e t h e importance of s y n c h r o n i c
l i n g u i s t i c s simply ' b e c a u s e i t i s more a k i n t o t h e a t t i t u d e of t h e
o r d i n a r y speaker", a l t h o u g h h e made a s t a t e m e n t t o t h i s e f f e c t ( c f .
CLG(E) , U l ) , b u t more s o b e c a u s e t h e system of language can b e e s t a b l i s h e d
o n l y a f t e r a language s t a t e h a s been e s t a b l i s h e d ( c f . CLG, 1 1 5 f f . ) .
3) The ' o r d i n a r y s p e a k e r ' o r t h e ' s u j e t p a r l a n t ' (CLG, l l 7 ) , t o u s e
S a u s s u r e ' s term, never became a concept w i t h i n S a u s s u r e ' s l i n g u i s t i c
t h e o r y i n c o n t r a s t t o B l o o m f i e l d ' s and t h e procedures of h i s f o l l o w e r s .
The g r a v e s t e r r o r s , however, committed by t h e m a j o r i t y of 20th-
c e n t u r y l i n g u i s t s when judging ~ a u s s u r e ' sachievements can b e c h a r a c t e r i z e d
a s follows: 1 ) b e c a u s e of t h e i r l a c k of f i r s t - h a n d a c q u a i n t a n c e w i t h
t h e l i t e r a t u r e of t h e t i m e b e f o i e t h e appearance of t h e C o w s , S a u s s u r e
i s r e g a r d e d by them a s someone who h a s come up w i t h completely n o v e l i d e a s ;
2) t h e i r g e n e r a l l a c k of h i s t o r i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e which followed a n over-
s i m p l i f i e d a d o p t i o n of t h e s y n c h r o n i c t r e a t m e n t of language f r e q u e n t l y
combined w i t h a d i s r e g a r d f o r work i n a d j a c e n t a r e a s of r e s e a r c h . Saus-
s u r e ' s p r o p o s a l s concerning t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between a n h i s t o r i c a l approach
t o l i n g u i s t i c phenomena and a ' s t a t i c ' c o n s i d e r a t i o n of l i n g u i s t i c func-
t i o n i n g i s a good i l l u s t r a t i o n of our c o n t e n t i o n a s we s h a l l s e e .
Three a r t i c l e s devoted t o t h e e l u c i d a t i o n of t h e background of
t h e 1 9 t h - c e n t u r y c o n c e p t i o n of h i s t o r y and i t s i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r l i n g u i s -
6
t i c s which we c o n s i d e r t o b e i m p o r t a n t appeared i n 1967. S. Heinimann,
i n h i s s t u d y "Zur Auffassung d e s G e s c h i c h t l i c h e n i n d e r h i s t o r i s c h e n
7
Grammatik d e s 1 9 . J a h r h u n d e r t s " , pays p a r t i c u l a r a t t e n t i o n t o t h e f a c t
t h a t t h e t e r m s " h i s t o r i s c h " o r " g e s c h i c h t l i c h " were i n t e r p r e t e d q u i t e
d i f f e r e n t l y i n 19th-century l i n g u i s t i c s , s t a r t i n g w i t h Grim's Deutsche
Grammatik ( 1 8 1 9 f f . ) t o Meyer-Liibke's Grammatik d e r romanischen S p r a c h e n
a t t h e t u r n of t h e c e n t u r y . Z s . T e l e g d i (l967:226), i n a similarly
o r i e n t a t e d p a p e r , draws a t t e n t i o n t o t h e f a c t t h a t " h i s t o r i s c h " d u r i n g
8
t h e t i m e of G r i m was synonymous w i t h "empirisch", w h i l e Heinimann
(1967:799ff.) shows t h a t , s i n c e S c h l e i c h e r ' s a d o p t i o n of (pre-) Darwinian
p r i n c i p l e s i n t h e e x p l a n a t i o n of l i n g u i s t i c development, t h e c o n c e p t of
h i s t o r y i n l i n g u i s t i c s h a s been markedly d i f f e r e n t from t h a t i n t h e o t h e r
sciences. T e l e g d i (1967:225) d e m o n s t r a t e s t h a t ' h i s t o r i c a l ' d u r i n g t h e
t i m e of G r i m m and even b e f o r e , was c o n t r a s t e d w i t h ' p h i l o s o p h i c a l ' , a
term which was used t o r e p l a c e t h e e a r l i e r term of r a t i o n a l and w a s
connected w i t h t h e t r a d i t i o n of t h e grmnmaire g&&aZe (cf. Telegdi,
1967: 228ff .), a concept which was b e t t e r known i n t h e German-speaking
c o u n t r i e s as "allgemeine Grammatik" o r " p h i l o s o p h i s c h e Grammatik".
The i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of h i s t o r i c a l w i t h e m p i r i c a l , T e l e g d i ( p . 226) p o i n t s
o u t , can b e t r a c e d back t o A r i s t o t l e , and a n i n t e r e s t i n g p a s s a g e , which
was overlooked by T e l e g d i , Heinimann, and Lieb ( l 9 6 7 ) , i n which Hermann
Paul re-affirmed t h i s c u r i o u s p o i n t of view i s s t r i k i n g l y r e l e v a n t :
 Am a l l e r w e n i g s t e n d a r f man diesem a l l g e m e i n e n T e i l e d e r
Sprachwissenschaft [whose o b j e c t i v e i t s h o u l d b e t o i n v e s -
t i g a t e t h e g e n e r a l c o n d i t i o n s of t h e h i s t o r i c a l develop-
ment of language] den h i s t o r i s c h e n a l s den empirischen
gegeniibersetzen. D e r e i n e i s t g e r a d e s o e m p i r i s c h w i e d e r
andere. 9

W e b e l i e v e t h a t t h e c o n t r a . s t between ' h i s t o r i c a l ' ('empiricalt)

and ' p h i l o s o p h i c a l " ('rational') h a s t o b e viewed a l o n g w i t h t h e par-
t i c u l a r u s e of h i s t o r y i n t h e 1 9 t h c e n t u r y a s p r a c t i s e d w i t h i n l i n g u i s -
t i c science. E a r l i e r p e r i o d s had adopted t h e more p h i l o s o p h i c a l t r e a t -
ment of m a t t e r s l i n g u i s t i c , probably under t h e i n f l u e n c e of D e s c a r t e s ,
and e x p r e s s i o n s such a s % l o s s h i s t o r i s c h " i n t h e s e n s e of n o t f o r m a l l y
o r g a n i z e d and a c c i d e n t a l were i n c u r r e n t u s e u n t i l t h e mid-19th c e n t u r y .
It was G r i m who took up t h e t r a d i t i o n a l o p p o s i t i o n of h i s t o r i c a l v e r s u s
p h i l o s o p h i c a l emphasizing however t h e importance of t h e " h i s t o r i c a l "
o v e r t h e " p h i l o s o p h i c a l " approach, t h u s l a y i n g t h e f o u n d a t i o n f o r t h e
'historical' t r e a t m e n t of language a s t h e o n l y a d e q u a t e and t r u l y s c i e n -
t i f i c approach t o language d e s c r i p t i o n ( c f . T e l e g d i , 1967:226f.).
Another p a i r of terms which h a s became i m p o r t a n t i n t h e s u b s e q u e n t
development of l i n g u i s t i c s c i e n c e a p p e a r s t o h a v e emerged d u r i n g t h e
19th-century soon a f t e r t h e ' p h i l o s o p h i c a l ' o r ' r a t i o n a l ' treatment
of l a n g u a g e had been d i s c a r d e d a s an i n a d e q u a t e approach. It i s n o t
c l e a r whether o r n o t ' p h i l o s o p h i c a l t h a s i n some way f u r n i s h e d t h e
e x p r e s s i o n ' d e s c r i p t i v e ' b u t t h e l a t t e r term (which a p t l y c h a r a c t e r i z e s
t h e work of Bopp and h i s f o l l o w e r s ) emerged a s a d e v i c e t o b e c o n t r a s t e d
w i t h t h e ' h i s t o r i c a l ' approach a l t h o u g h , c u r i o u s l y enough, empiricism
was a t t h e b a s i s of b o t h p r o c e d u r e s . P a u l ' s dictum, which h a s r a i s e d
much o p p o s i t i o n i n t h e 20th c e n t u r y , t h a t h i s t o r i c a l l i n g u i s t i c s pro-
v i d e s t h e o n l y t r u l y s c i e n t i f i c t r e a t m e n t of language and h i s r e j e c t i o n
of t h e " b l o s s d e s k r i p t i v e Gramrnatik" r e p r e s e n t s t h e f i n a l c o n c l u s i o n of
t h e l i n g u i s t i c argument i n i t i a t e d by G r i m .
T e l e g d i (1967:230) makes mention of August F r i e d r i c h B e r n h a r d i
(1770-1820) whose l i n g u i s t i c work i n luenced Humboldt c o n s i d e r a b l y .
I n h i s Anfangsgriinde der Sprachwissenschaft ( B e r l i n : FrGhlich , 1805) ,
B e r n h a r d i r e g a r d e d g e n e r a l grammar a s i d e n t i c a l w i t h l i n g u i s t i c s tout
court d e f i n i n g "Sprachwissenschaft oder S p r a c h l e h r e , p h i l o s o p h i s c h e
I

Grammatik" a s " d i e Wissenschaft von d e r unbedingten [ i . e . n e c e s s a r y and

i d e a l ] Form d e r Sprache" (p. 7 ) . The emphasis on t h e ' e m p i r i c a l ' o r
' h i s t o r i c a l ' t r e a t m e n t of l i n g u i s t i c phenomena by t h e s c h o l a r s of t h e
n e x t g e n e r a t i o n , v i z . Grimrn and Rask and a l s o Bopp, e x p l a i n s why Bern-
hardi's ' p h i l o s o p h i c a l ' approach f e l l i n t o o b l i v i o n and was r e c o g n i z e d
o n l y by t h o s e , i n p a r t i c u l a r Humboldt, who were e s p e c i a l l y i n t e r e s t e d
i n t h e s o l u t i o n of g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c problems and who t h e r e f o r e r e f e r r e d
back t o 1 7 t h and 1 8 t h c e n t u r y l i n g u i s t i c t h o u g h t . lo On t h e o t h e r hand,
Bernhardi, a s DelbrGck p o i n t e d o u t i n 1904, c l e a r l y d i s t i n g u i s h e d between
t h i s p h i l o s o p h i c a l approach t o language, which d e a l s w i t h a g i v e n and
11
complete o b j e c t i n a n a - h i s t o r i c a l f a s h i o n , and t h e h i s t o r i c a l one.
It a p p e a r s t h a t t h e r e have always been two k i n d s of approaches t o language
though t h e emphasis a l t e r n a t e d between them; a p e r i o d of p r e d i l e c t i o n
f o r t h e o r e t i c a l d i s c u s s i o n i s g e n e r a l l y followed by a p e r i o d of d a t a
accumulation and more p r a c t i c a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s of l i n g u i s t i c problems,
and v i c e v e r s a . Paul, i n h i s "Geschichte d e r germanischen P h i l o l o g i e " ,
d i s t i n g u i s h e d between p r a c t i c a l and p h i l o s o p h i c a l grammars which have
12
c o - e x i s t e d a t l e a s t s i n c e t h e Renaissance; however, we must c l e a r l y
d i s t i n g u i s h between t h e s e two k i n d s of d i v e r g i n g i n t e r e s t s and reckon
w i t h t h e a l t e r n a t i n g p a t t e r n of emphasis, e.g. Alexander of V i l l e d i e u ' s
DoctrinaZe of 1199 which s e r v e d f o r a l m o s t f o u r c e n t u r i e s as a s t a n d a r d
manual f o r t h e t e a c h i n g of L a t i n on t h e one hand, and P e t e r H e l i a s '
S m a gramaticae w r i t t e n i n t h e middle of t h e 1 2 t h c e n t u r y which ex-
p l i c i t l y s o u g h t p h i l o s o p h i c a l e x p l a n a t i o n s f o r t h e grammatical r u l e s
l a i d down i n P r i s c i a n ' s voluminous grammar of L a t i n (which Alexander
of V i l l e d i e u had merely t r i e d t o s i m p l i f y and make more d i g e s t i b l e f o r
pedagogical purposes).
Where t h e neogrammarian u s e of t h e e x p r e s s i o n ' h i s t o r i c a l ' i s
concerned, i t i s i n t e r e s t i n g t o n o t e t h a t t h e i r views d i d n o t e s s e n t i a l l y
't
d i f f e r from S c h l e i c h e r 's . T h e i r t a c i L a c c e p t a n c e of ~ c h l e i c h e 's
r evo-
l u t i o n a l i s t theories, i n contrast t o t h e i r o f f i c i a l opposition t o h i s
t h e o r y a s a whole, i s p a r t i c u l a r l y e v i d e n t from t h e i r concept of t h e
1I
L a u t g e s e t z e " p r o c l a i m i n g t h e n e c e s s i t y and r e g u l a r i t y of l i n g u i s t i c
change ( c f . Heinimann, 1967:800). It must b e remembered t h a t t h e work
of h i s t o r i a n s of t h e c a l i b r e of ' ~ e o ~ o von
l d Ranke (1795-1886) and Theodor
Momrnsen (1817-1903) and t h e i r p o s i t i v i s t i c a t t i t u d e towards h i s t o r y
(which p l a c e d p a r t i c u l a r emphasis on c a r e f u l c o l l e c t i o n of f a c t s a t
t h e expense of a n o v e r a l l c o n s i d e r a t i o n of t h e i r s t u d y and i n t e r p r e t a t i o n )
c o u l d n o t have f a i l e d t o have had i t s impact on l i n g u i s t i c s , n o t a b l y i n
~ e r m a n ~ . ' S~a u s s u r e ' s dependence on i d e a s c u r r e n t i n h i s t i m e i s obvious
from t h e f a c t t h a t h e spoke of ' l i n g u i s t i q u e & o l u t i v e l (CLG, 117;
CLG(E) , 180; SM, 8 0 ) , which h e l a t e r r e p l a c e d by ' l i n g u i s t i q u e c i n &
matique' o r ' d i a c h r o n i q u e ' (CLG(E) , 181) ,I4 and indeed h e a p p e a r s t o
h a v e spoken of "une 6 v o l u t i o n aveugle" (CLG, 317; c f . however CLG(E),
514), t h u s echoing L e s k i e n ' s famous s t a t e m e n t of 1876 ( c f . Robins, 1967:
183). C h a r a c t e r i s t i c of c e r t a i n b u t n o t a l l t r e n d s of t h e j u n g g r m t i s c h e
Richtung appear t o have been t h e s t a t e m e n t s made by t h e Romance s c h o l a r
W. Meyer-Liibke (1861-1936) i n h i s Einfiihrung i n das Studium der romanischen
Sprachwissenschaft of 1901 where h e d i s t i n g u i s h e d between a " b i o l o g i s c h e
Forschung" which i s " e i n e durchaus entwicklungsgeschichtliche'~ ( i . e .
d e a l i n g w i t h t h e h i s t o r y of development of l i n g u i s t i c forms) and a
" p a l Z o n t o l o g i s c h e Forschung" t h e e x p l i c i t g o a l of which i s "verschwundene
S p r a c h z u s t l n d e w i e d e r h e r z u s t e l l e n " . l5 S e v e r a l paragraphs e a r l i e r Meyer-
Liibke had d e f i n e d t h e t a s k of Romance l i n g u i s t i c s a s t h a t of t r a c i n g t h e
development of t h e languages of t h e Romania from t h e i r e a r l y b e g i n n i n g s
t o t h e i r p r e s e n t s t a g e , t o r e c o r d t h e s e changes, d e l i n e a t e them w i t h
r e g a r d t o t i m e and s p a c e , and t o d e s c r i b e t h e r e s u l t s of t h e changes a t
a g i v e n p o i n t of time. When h e s t a t e s t h a t i t i s a q u e s t i o n of " v e r t i k a l e
und um h o r i z o n t a l e D a r s t e l l u n g " of t h e f a c t s of language, h e seems t o
echo Hugo S c h u c h a r d t ' s (1842-1927) o b s e r v a t i o n of 1874 i n which t h e
same s i m i l e was employed, l6 and t o a n t i c i p a t e S a u s s u r e ' s diagram i l l u s -
t r a t i n g h i s d i s t i n c t i o n between t h e axe des simuZtan6it6.s and t h e axe des
successivit& (CLG, 115; CLG(E), 1 1 7 ) . I n c o n t r a s t t o Schuchardt, where
t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between t h e h o r i z o n t a l and t h e v e r t i c a l a s p e c t of language
remains a remark made en passant and w i t h o u t any consequences f o r t h e
subsequent argument, Meyer-Liibke p o i n t s o u t t h a t one should d e s i g n a t e
" d i e horizontaZe D a r s t e l l u n g a l s Systematik", and i t i s i t s g o a l t o
I
17
summarize c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s a s t h e b a s i s f o r language c l a s s i f i c a t i o n .
T h i s i s c o n t r a s t e d w i t h t h e t a s k s of t h e ' v e r t i c a l ' t r e a t m e n t o f languages
where Meyer-Liibke d i s t i n g u i s h e s between t h e downward approach (which h e
c a l l s "Biologic") and t h e upward approach ( " P a l ~ o n t o l o g i e " ) , b o t h of
18
which t a k e up t h e b u l k o f h i s Einfiihrung.
I n a p a s s a g e from t h e f i r s t e d i t i o n of t h i s book quoted b y Lieb
(1967: 2 4 ) , Meyer-Liibke showed h i m s e l f c r i t i c a l of what h e c a l l e d "Syste-
matik", b u t t h i s a t t i t u d e changed a n a c c e p t a n c e i n p r i n c i p l e of t h i s
c o n c e p t i n h i s second e d i t i o n of 1909. This was probably due t o t h e
19
i n f l u e n c e of 0. D i t t r i c h ' s Grundziige der SprachpsychoZogie of 1903,
a book which s c r u t i n i z e d P a u l ' s Prinzipien and s u g g e s t e d a number of
emendations of P a u l ' s l i n g u i s t i c argument ( c f . 1.3.2.2.2). A t roughly
t h e same t i m e Rudolf Meringer (1859-1931) d i s t i n g u i s h e d between a n h i s -
20
t o r i c a l and a d e s c r i p t i v e t a s k of l i n g u i s t i c s , and we a r e r a t h e r
s a f e i n s a y i n g t h a t t h e r e was, a t t h e t u r n of t h i s c e n t u r y , a g e n e r a l
awareness among l i n g u i s t s of d i f f e r e n t p e r s u a s i o n s a b o u t a twofold
21
approach t o t h e t r e a t m e n t of l i n g u i s t i c phenomena.
With r e g a r d t o q u e s t i o n s concerning t h e a n t e c e d e n t s of S a u s s u r e ' s
i n f l u e n t i a l d i s t i n c t i o n between ' s y n c h r o n i c ' o r ' i d i o s y n c h r o n i c ' (cf.
SM, 278) and ' d i a c h r o n i c ' o r 'cin'ematique' ( c f . LTS, 1 6 ) i n l i n g u i s t i c s
i t i s i n e v i t a b l e t h a t t h e p o s s i b i l i t y of e x t r a - l i n g u i s t i c i n f l u e n c e s
w i l l b e r a i s e d , and i t i s t h e r e f o r e a p p r o p r i a t e t h a t t h e m a t t e r s h o u l d
b e d i s c u s s e d i n view of t h e number of s u g g e s t i o n s which h a v e b e e n made
s i n c e t h e appearance of t h e Cows i n 1916. Schuchardt, f o r i n s t a n c e ,
i n h i s review of S a u s s u r e ' s posthumous work i n 1917, drew a t t e n t i o n t o
A . Comte's d i s t i n c t i o n between ' s t a t i c ' and 'dynamic' a s p e c t s of s o c i a l
phenomena;22 we h a v e quoted some of t h e r e l e v a n t p a s s a g e s from t h e f o u r t h
volume of Comte's Cows de philosophie positive of 1839 e a r l i e r i n t h i s
s t u d y ( c f . 1.2.1.2) i n o r d e r t o i l l u s t r a t e t h i s i d e a , t h e f i r s t component
of which seems p a r t i c u l a r l y s u g g e s t i v e b e c a u s e S a u s s u r e d i d employ
'static' a s b e i n g synonymous w i t h ' s y n c h r o n i c ' ( c f . CLG, 117, 141;
SM, 277). Lieb (1967: 1 9 ) q u o t e s two p a s s a g e s from a l a t e r p u b l i c a t i o n
by Comte i n which t h i s d i s t i n c t i o n was t a k e n up a g a i n . I n t h e preliminary
p a r a g r a p h s of h i s ~yst2mede po3itique positive of 1852, Comte p o i n t e d
out:

~ ' 6 t u d ep o s i t i v e d e l ' ~ u m a n i t 6d o i t G t r e d6composge en deux

p a r t i e s e s s e n t i e l l e s : l ' u n e , s t a t i q u e , concerne l a n a t u r e
fondamentale du grand organisme; l ' a u t r e , dynamique, s e
r a p p o r t e 2 s o n 6 v o l u t i o n n 6 c e s s a i r e . 23

T h i s p a s s a g e i s q u i t e i n t e r e s t i n g f o r a number of r e a s o n s , i n p a r t i c u l a r
when we n o t e t h a t Comte s p e a k s , i n t h e subsequent page, of " 1 1 i d e n t i t 6
fondamentale d e s d i v e r s 6 t a t s s u c c e s s i f s " , b o t h q u o t a t i o n s c o n t a i n i n g
24
terms i f n o t c o n c e p t i o n s which remind us of i d e a s proposed i n t h e Cours.
S a u s s u r e employed t h e t r a d i t i o n a l term of 'organism' on s e v e r a l o c c a s i o n s
i n t h e s e n s e of 'system' ( c f . CLG, 40, 41, 42; LTS, 38) and spoke no
l e s s f r e q u e n t l y of ' e v o l u t i o n ' ( c f . CLG, 24, 193; LTS, 23). Furthermore,
a s w e w i l l s e e i n t h e s u b s e q u e n t c h a p t e r (2.2.2.2), t h e concept of Ztat
p l a y s a n i m p o r t a n t r 6 l e i n S a u s s u r e ' s synchrony/diachrony d i s t i n c t i o n
a s w e l l a s i n t h e n o t i o n of i d e n t i t y ( s . 2.2.5.2; c f . Godel, 1966:484).
However, a s on p r e v i o u s o c c a s i o n s ( c f . 1 . 2 . 1 ) , a c l o s e a n a l y s i s of Cornte's
t h e o r e t i c a l argument r e v e a l s t h a t t h e r e i s no d i r e c t l i n e which c o u l d
b e drawn from him t o S a u s s u r e . But t h e r e e x i s t s u f f i c i e n t r e a s o n s t o
b e l i e v e t h a t h e was a c q u a i n t e d w i t h Comte's work which was v e r y i n f l u e n -
t i a l i n 1 9 t h c e n t u r y thought. It c o u l d even b e imagined t h a t S a u s s u r e
adopted, a s h e d i d i n t h e c a s e of ' v a l e u r ' and c e r t a i n o t h e r r e l a t e d
terms which h e d e r i v e d from economic t h e o r y ( c f . 1.2.1.3), expressions
found o u t s i d e l i n g u i s t i c s t u d i e s , f o r i n s t a n c e from Comte's work. The
p a r t i c u l a r meaning S a u s s u r e a t t a h c e d t o terms such a s ' s t a t i c ' , '&at1,
'successivit6', 'identitg', however, a r e t h e r e s u l t of h i s r e f l e c t i o n
on eminently l i n g u i s t i c problems.
I n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between ' s t a t i c ' and 'dynamic',
someonewho however h a s been i g n o r e d i n t h e l i t e r a t u r e e x c e p t f o r a
r e f e r e n c e by V. Mathesius i n 1 9 1 1 , ~ and
~ who made s t a t e m e n t s which we
t h i n k come much c l o s e r t o t h e Saussurean concept of s y n c h r o n i c v s .
d i a c h r o n i c t h a n anyone e l s e i n t h e l i t e r a t u r e o u t s i d e l i n g u i s t i c s i n t h e
1 9 t h c e n t u r y i s worthy of mention. ~ h o m & G a r r i g u e Masaryk (1850-1937)
p u b l i s h e d h i s Versuch einer concreten U g i k i n 1887, a book which, a s
i t s s u b t i t l e i n d i c a t e s , 2 6 was ad a t t e m p t a t a c l a s s i f i c a t i o n and or-
g a n i z a t i o n of t h e s c i e n c e s from a l o g i c a l and m e t h o d o l o g i c a l p o i n t of
view. 27 S i g n i f i c a n t l y , and we r e f e r t o t h i s p o i n t p a r t i c u l a r l y b e c a u s e
w e b e l i e v e t h a t t h e r e i s a c e r t a i n a f f i n i t y between h i s views and Saus-
s u r e ' s , Masaryk s t a r t s h i s o u t l i n e w i t h a d e f i n i t i o n of s c i e n c e :

Unter Wissenschaft v e r s t e h e n w i r e i n bestimmtes System von

E r k e n n t n i s s e n , d i e s i c h auf e i n e n Gegenstand o d e r auf Gegen-
s t z n d e bestimmter A r t b e z i e h e n . Ein solches System i s t keine
bZosse ZusammensteZZung uon einzelnen Erkenntnissen, sondern
eine durchdachte Anordnung derseZben [ i . e . of f i n d i n g s ] ...
Unter Wissenschaft i n diesem s t r e n g e n S i n n des Wortes v e r s t e h e n
w i r a b e r d a s v e r s t h d i g e E r f a s s e n d e r Dinge und d i e E r k l k u n g
d e r s e l b e n i n i h r e r Coexistenz und Succession, s o f e r n uns d i e s e
Erklzrung iiberhaupt mzglich i s t . (1887:13; o u r i t a l i c s ) .

This bold statement i s important f o r s e v e r a l reasons. F i r s t l y , Masaryk

emphasizes (and t h i s i s a l s o c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of S a u s s u r e ) t h e primacy o f
t h e o r y , i.e . of knowing what one i s doing ( c f . CFS 20: 1 3 ) ; t o g e t h e r
w i t h t h i s p r e r e q u i s i t e , t h e r e i s t h e n e c e s s i t y of s y s t e m a t i z a t i o n of
t h e membra d i s i e c t a i n o r d e r t o t u r n o n e ' s a c t i v i t y i n t o something which
c o u l d r i g h t l y b e named s c i e n c e . T h i r d l y , and t h i s i s of p a r t i c u l a r
i n t e r e s t t o t h e p r e s e n t d i s c u s s i o n , Masaryk r e q u e s t s t h a t t h e o b j e c t
of i n v e s t i g a t i o n s h o u l d b e approached from two d i s t i n c t a n g l e s , i . e .
t h e c o e x i s t e n c e and s u c c e s s i o n of i t s d a t a . It must b e p o i n t e d o u t
t h a t t h i s opening s t a t e m e n t does n o t r e p r e s e n t a remark en passant
b u t a p r i n c i p l e by means of which Masaryk s c r u t i n i z e s and a n a l y z e s t h e '

v a r i o u s branches of t h e s o c i a l and n a t u r a l s c i e n c e s . Indeed, i n t h e

f i r s t f o o t n o t e of h i s t h e o r e t i c a l o u t l i n e , immediately f o l l o w i n g t h e
d i s t i n c t i o n between t h e a s p e c t s of c o - e x i s t e n c e and s u c c e s s i o n , t h e
a u t h o r r e f e r s t o t h e c o n t r a s t between s t a t i c and dynamic, a d i s t i n c t i o n
which h e a d m i t t e d l y took from Comte ( c f . op. c i t . , 139 and 146) and
which h e r e f e r s t o f r e q u e n t l y i n h i s argument ( i b i d . , 88, 1 9 1 f . , 228,
and e l s e w h e r e ) .
We should r e c a l l t h a t S a u s s u r e s t r u g g l e d w i t h t h e problem of making
l i n g u i s t i c s a s c i e n c e independent of o t h e r s c i e n c e s , n o t a b l y s o c i o l o g y
and psychology ( c f . CLG, 2 1 and 3 3 ) , and t h a t h i s a t t e m p t s w e r e n o t
wholly s u c c e s s f u l d e s p i t e h i s c i a i m s t h a t l i n g u i s t i c s was t o b e r e g a r d e d
as an autonomous s u b j e c t of s t u d y ( c f . CLG(E) , 515) 28. Masaryk t o o n o t e s
t h a t ( a p a r t from physiology which posed no p a r t i c u l a r problem t o e i t h e r
S a u s s u r e o r t h e neogrammarians s i n c e t h e y regarded p h o n e t i c s a s an a u x i l f a r y
s c i e n c e o n l y ) , psychology and s o c i o l o g y have f u r n i s h e d most of t h e p r i n -
c i p l e s of language s t u d y ( c f . Versuch, 1 8 9 ) , b u t h e a r g u e s t h a t l i n g u i s t i c s
s h o u l d b e r e g a r d e d a s a s e p a r a t e s c i e n c e (p. l 8 7 ) , i n p a r t i c u l a r s i n c e
i t t o o h a s i t s p r o p e r o b j e c t (p. 1 9 0 ) . N e v e r t h e l e s s t h e twofold a s p e c t s
under which psychology s t u d i e s i t s phenomena, namely t h e i r co-exis t e n c e
and s u c c e s s i o n ( c f . p. 117) ,29 and t h e complementary approaches by which
s o c i o l o g y a t t e m p t s t o e x h a u s t i t s o b j e c t of i n v e s t i g a t i o n , namely t h o s e
of s t a t i c s and dynamics ( s . pp. 1 3 9 f f . ) ,30 do have t h e i r impact on l i n -
g u i s t i c methodology. A s f a r a s s o c i o l o g y i s concerned, and we b e l i e v e
t h a t t h i s i s s i g n i f i c a n t f o r l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y a s w e l l , Masaryk s t a t e s :

Vergleichend s t u d i r e n w i r entweder d i e Coexistenx d e r s o c i a l e n

Phgnomene o d e r d e r e n S u c c e s s i o n . Vom s t a t i s c h e n G e s i c h t s p u n k t e
gelangen w i r zu den Regeln iiber d i e Coexistenz, erkennen w i r
d i e w e c h s e Z s e i t i g e A b x n g i g k e i t und WechseZwirkzmg d e r g e s e l l -
s c h a f t l i c h e n K r z f t e und d r i n g e n s o zu dem i n h a l t s r e i e h e n Be-
g r i f f e d e s geseZlschaftZichen Consensus [ c f FdS 's f a i t d e .
Zangue] v o r , demgemzss einem j e d e n Zustande auf einem gewissen
G e b i e t e d e s g e s e l l s c h a f t l i c h e n Lebens auf einem z w e i t e n G e b i e t e
e i n bestirnrnter Zustand e n t s p r i c h t . (Versuch, 142; o u r i t a l i c s ) .

But Masaryk does n o t c o n t e n t h i m s e l f w i t h p o i n t i n g t o t h e f a c t t h a t

l i n g u i s t i c s e x h i b i t s methodological a f f i n i t i e s w i t h s o c i o l o g y and a l s o
w i t h h i s t o r y ( c f . i b i d . , 1 7 3 ) , b u t h e demands e x p l i c i t l y , i n t h e s e c -
t i o n devoted t o l i n g u i s t i c s , 3 1 t h a t b o t h t h e o r e t i c a l and p r a c t i c a l l i n -
g u i s t i c s (Masaryk speaks of " a b s t r a c t e S p r a c h l e h r e " and, under t h e
i n l u e n c e of P a u l [ c f . pp. 1 9 0 f f . 1, of " c o n c r e t e Sprachgeschichte")
d e a l w i t h two t a s k s which correspond t o s t a t i c s and dynamics i n s o c i -
ology, c a l l i n g t h e f i r s t simply "Grammatik" ( c f . S a u s s u r e ' s t e n t a t i v e
i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of grammar w i t h synchrony; CLG, 185) and t h e second " d i e
sogenannte h i s t o r i s c h e Grammatik" (Versuch, 191f. ) .
I f , and o n l y i f , S a u s s u r e had v e n t u r e d t o l o o k o u t s i d e l i n g u i s t i c s
f o r i n s p i r a t i o n and s u p p o r t of h i s own t h e o r e t i c a l argument, h e might
h a v e found b o t h i n Masaryk's Versuch of 1887. However, i t s h o u l d n o t
I

b e f o r g o t t e n t h a t Kruszewski had, a s e a r l y a s 1883, made v e r y s i m i l a r

observations. I n f a c t S a u s s u r e owned a copy of Techmer's Z e i t s c h r i f t
( c f . De Mauro, 19683361f.) i n which t h e German v e r s i o n of Kruszewski's
treatise appeared ( 1 8 8 4 f f . ) i n which we f i n d , a s we h a v e demonstrated
earlier ( c f . 1 . 3 . 3 . 3 ) , t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between dynamic and s t a t i c laws
g o v e r n i n g t h e sound system of a g i v e n language ( c f . Kruszewski, 1885:
262-3; 1887: 149) a s w e l l a s t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between "Koexistenz" and
11
Konsequenz" (1884: 303; 1887: 156, 159) b e i n g made. A s i s probably t r u e
i n t h e c a s e of Whitney who d e r i v e d h i s s o c i o l o g i c a l argument from Spencer
(cf. 1.3.1), Kruszewski adopted c e r t a i n p r i n c i p l e s from s o c i a l s c i e n c e s
o t h e r t h a n l i n g u i s t i c s , i n p a r t i c u l a r from t h e work of M i l l ( c f . Kru-
s z e w s k i , 1884:304, n . 1 ) . I f Masaryk's work o f f e r s a s t r i k i n g example
of o u r c l a i m t h a t l i n g u i s t i c s r e f l e c t s t o a l a r g e e x t e n t t h e i n t e l l e c -
t u a l t r e n d s of i t s t i m e and t h a t many of S a u s s u r e ' s i d e a s were ' i n t h e
a i r ' d u r i n g t h e p e r i o d i n which h e developed, t h e works of t h e psycho-
l o g i s t F r a n z Brentano (1838-1917)and t h e language p h i l o s o p h e r Anton
Marty (1847-1914) which appeared d u r i n g roughly t h e same p e r i o d do n o t ,
c o n t r a r y t o what h a s been claimed i n t h e l i t e r a t ~ r e ,o ~
f f~e r any s t a t e -
ments which could b e compared w i t h t h o s e i n Masaryk's Versuch.
However, we must i n s i s t t h a t S a u s s u r e ' s p r i n c i p a l and d i r e c t s o u r c e s
(and t h i s h a s been o u r c o n v i c t i o n a l l a l o n g ) have mainly been t h e work
of h i s f e l l o w - l i n g u i s t s , a s h e suggested himself i n an i n t e r v i e w with
A. R i e d l i n g e r i n J a n u a r y 1909 ( s . SM, 2 9 ) , and t h e r e f o r e , a s t h e r e a r e
many more convincing s o u r c e s t o b e found i n a number of Zinguistic
s t u d i e s of t h e l a s t t h i r d o f t h e 1 9 t h c e n t u r y i n which S a u s s u r e ' s d i s -
t i n c t i o n i s , i n one way o r a n o t h e r , a n t i c i p a t e d , we s h a l l t u r n o u t a t t e n -
t i o n t o these.
F i r s t of a l l , i t i s n e c e s s a r y t o emphasize t h a t S a u s s u r e developed
h i s d i s t i n c t i o n between synchrony and diachrony f a i r l y e a r l y i n h i s
life. I n h i s h i t h e r t o unpublished a p p r e c i a t i o n of Whitney's work of
1894 ( c f . . 1 . 3 . 1 ) , S a u s s u r e noted:

Nous n o u r r i s s o n s d e p u i s b i e n d e s annges c e t t e c o n v i c t i o n que

l a l i n g u i s t i q u e e s t une s c i e n c e doubZe, e t s i < profondgment,
 irr6meaiablement > double, qu'on p e u t < 2 v r a i d i r e >
se demander s ' i l y a une r a i s o n s u f f i s a n t e pour rnain-
t e n i r s o u s c e nom d e Zinguistique une u n i t 6 < i l l u s o i r e
[ c r o s s e d o u t ] f a c t i c e , > g 6 n 6 r a t r i c e < prgcisgment >
d e t o u t e s les e r r e u r s , d e t o u s les i n e x t r i c a b l e s piGges
c o n t r e l e s q u e l s nous nous d g b a t t o n s chaque j o u r , avec
l e sentiment [ 1. Avant que c e t t e d u a l i t 6 fondamen-
t a l e a i t 6t6 < reconnue, a u moins d i s c u t 6 e > nous
admettons q u ' i l p e u t y a v o i r < d ' u n e p a r t des > o p i n i o n s
< simplement > chimgriques, e t d ' a u t r e s q u i o n t < l e >
m 6 r i t e d e n e pas c o n t r e d i r e l a r 6 a l i t 6 d e s f a i t s ....
33

We may conclude from t h i s p a s s a g e t h a t S a u s s u r e had conceived of

t h e n e c e s s i t y f o r d i s t i n g u i s h i n g between t h e d e s c r i p t i v e o r ' s t a t i c '
and t h e h i s t o r i c a l o r 'dynamic' t r e a t m e n t of l i n g u i s t i c f a c t s p r i o r
t o h i s a c c e p t a n c e of t h e p r o f e s s o r s h i p i n Geneva i n 1891. T h i s would,
from a c h r o n o l o g i c a l p o i n t of view, e x c l u d e Brentano, Marty, Gabelentz
( c f . 1.3.4.2.2), and o t h e r s a s S a u s s u r e ' s s o u r c e of i n s p i r a t i o n . Further-
more, i t i s unnecessary t o go back t o t h e a n c i e n t I n d i a n grammarians,
as S. Al-George h a s r e c e n t l y d o n e , t o t r a c e t h e o r i g i n s of ' s t r u c t u r a l i s m '
34
and t o s u g g e s t t h e i r i n f l u e n c e on S a u s s u r e , particularly since there
a r e s e v e r a l immediate p o s s i b l e s o u r c e s which were d i r e c t l y a v a i l a b l e t o
t h e Western European t h e o r e t i c i a n of language of t h e l a s t two decades
of t h e 1 9 t h c e n t u r y .
E a r l i e r i n t h i s c h a p t e r we i l l u s t r a t e d t h a t t h e r e was a g e n e r a l
awareness of t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between d e s c r i p t i v e and h i s t o r i c a l methods
of language a n a l y s i s a t t h e t u r n of t h i s c e n t u r y . I n t h e following
p a r a g r a p h s w e w i l l r e f e r t o a number of l i n g u i s t s who, between 1868
and 1886 made e x p l i c i t s t a t e m e n t s t o t h i s e f f e c t .
F i r s t t h e r e i s a c l e a r s t a t e m e n t and p r o c e d u r e which f o l l o w s t h e
d e s c r i p t i v e approach t o l i n g u i s t i c phenomena i n J . Baudouin d e Cour-
t e n a y ' s d i s s e r t a t i o n of 1 8 6 8 , ~ ' t o which h i s p u p i l made a d i r e c t r e f e r -
ence i n 1883 ( s . Kruszewski, 1884:299) when h e c o n t r a s t e d t h e " h i s t o r i s c h e n
StandpunktN w i t h t h e " j e t z i g e n Sprache" ( c f . L i e b , 1967:23 f o r a f u l l
quotation). However, a p a r t from t h e f a c t t h a t Baudouin's t h e s i s was
g e n e r a l l y i g n o r e d by h i s contemporaries a l t h o u g h i t was devoted t o t h e
phenomenon of analogy i n language, a p r i n c i p l e which became one of t h e
c o r n e r - s t o n e s of t h e neogrammarian d o c t r i n e t e n y e a r s l a t e r , ~ a u d o u i n ' s
l a t e r d i s t i n c t i o n between ' s t a t i c ' and 'dynamic' was expounded i n s t u d i e s
& i t t e n i n Russian o r P o l i s h a i d p u b l i s h e d i n p l a c e s which w e r e h a r d l y
a c c e s s i b l e t o Western l i n g u i s t s
36
.
Kruszewski's a c q u a i n t a n c e w i t h t h e t h e o r i e s of t h e neogrammarians
( c f . Kruszewski, 1881:28-37), and h i s a f f i r m a t i o n t h a t t h e r e was a c l o s e
a f f i n i t y between t h e p r i n c i p l e s h e l d a t Kazan and t h o s e p u t forward by
t h e Junggrammatiker ( c f . Lieb , 1967: 231, immediately s u g g e s t t h e work
of P a u l which c o u l d n o t h a v e f a i l e d t o a r o u s e t h e i n t e r e s t of Baudouin
and, i n p a r t i c u l a r , Kruszewski who e n t i t l e d h i s d i s s e r t a t i o n of 1883
' O u t l i n e of l i n g u i s t i c s c i e n c e ' , 37 probably f o l l o w i n g t h e example of
P a u l ' s P r i n z i p i e n (and p o s s i b l y a l s o S t e i n t h a l 's A b d s s ) . S i n c e we
have demonstrated i n an e a r l i e r c h a p t e r ( s . 1.3.2.2.2) that Paul's
t h e o r e t i c a l work was p r o b a b l y a prime s o u r c e of S a u s s u r e ' s l i n g u i s t i c
i d e a s , i n c l u d i n g t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between d e s c r i p t i v e and h i s t o r i c a l
t r e a t m e n t of language, l i t t l e needs t o b e added h e r e ( c f . a l s o t h e
p r e s e n t a t i o n by Lieb , 1967: 20-22). However, most of t h e st$tements
concerning ' d e s c r i p t i v e grammar', 'language s t a t e ' , t h e c o n t r a s t between
'Lautwandel' and 'Lautwechsel', and r e l a t e d c o n c e p t s were made e x p l i c i t
i n t h e second e d i t i o n of P a u l ' s P r i n z i p i e n i n 1886, a l t h o u g h many of
t h e s e i d e a s had been i n h e r e n t i n h i s argument of 1880. Kruszewski's
s o u r c e , however, i n s o f a r a s t h e ' s t a t i c ' / ' d y n a m i c t dichotomy i s con-
cerned, was c e r t a i n l y Baudouin and p o s s i b l y a l s o 1 9 t h c e n t u r y p h i l o s o -
p h e r s and s o c i o l o g i s t s b u t h a r d l y P a u l . 38 I n h i s 1883 t r e a t i s e Kru-
szewski d i s t i n g u i s h e d , a s we n o t e d e a r l i e r i n t h i s c h a p t e r , between t h e
' s t a t i c law' of a sound by which h e meant t h a t a sound i s a p p r o x i m a t e l y
homogeneous ('hnnzhernd g l e i c h a r t i g " ) w i t h a l l i n d i v i d u a l s of a g i v e n
d i a l e c t and a t a g i v e n t i m e ( s . Kruszewski, 1885:262), and dynamic f e a t u r e s
w i t h o u t , however, e x p a t i a t i n g on t h e s e terms t o make them l i n g u i s t i c a l l y
more r e l e v a n t . 3 9 S u f f i c e i t t o n o t e t h a t Kruszewski n o t o n l y s u g g e s t e d
b u t adhered t o p r i n c i p l e s of ' s y n c h r o n i c ' l i n g u i s t i c s a s can b e demon-
40
s t r a t e d from h i s f r e q u e n t u s e of t h e n o t i o n of system i n language,
h i s c r i t i c a l a t t i t u d e towards t h e concept of t h e "Einf Zjrmigkeit des
Zustandes" (1887: 152) and h i s query whether a "Zustand d e r S p r . [ a c h e ] "
 could b e permanent (1890 :134) 41 . S a u s s u r e must have found a t l e a s t a
number of h i s . o w n views c o n f i r m i d i n t h i s volume ( c f . a l s o 1 . 3 . 3 . 3 ) .
I n h i s i n a u g u r a l l e c t u r e of 1885, Brugmann, t h e most i m p o r t a n t
spokesman of t h e j u n g g r m a t i s c h e Richtung, observed t h e f o l l o w i n g a b o u t
t h e r e l a t i o n of p h i l o l o g y and l i n g u i s t i c s :

Friiher k o n n t e man o f t hEren, d e r P h i l o l o g i e komme auf Grund

i h r e s B e g r i f f e s d i e P f l e g e d e r descriptiuen o d e r s t a t i s t i s c h e n
Grammatik zu, d e r v e r g l e i c h e n d e n S p r a c h w i s s e n s c h a f t dagegen d i e
entwick Zungsgeschich t Ziche Forschung .42
This p a s s a g e r e v e a l s t h a t Brugmann was, p r i o r t o t h e p u b l i c a t i o n of P a u l ' s
r e v i s e d and much e n l a r g e d e d i t i o n of t h e Prinzipien, q u i t e aware of t h e
t e r m i n o l o g i c a l and methodological d i f f e r e n c e between t h e ' d e s c r i p t i v e '
or 'static' and t h e ' h i s t o r i c a l ' o r ' e v o l u t i o n i s t i c ' t r e a t m e n t of l i n -
g u i s t i c phenomena. I n t h e subsequent y e a r P a u l a d v i s e d t h e s t u d e n t
t o f o l l o w c a r e f u l p r o c e d u r e s i n h i s a n a l y s i s of language s t a t e s ( t h e
e s t a b l i s h m e n t of which P a u l r e g a r d s a s a p r e r e q u i s i t e t o an a d e q u a t e
t r e a t m e n t of t h e h i s t o r i c a l f a c t s of language) s i n c e :

Sehr l e i c h t wird d a s B i l d e i n e s bestimmten Sprachzustandes

g e t r i i b t , wenn dem B e t r a c h t e r e i n e nahe verwandte Sprache oder
e i n e z l t e r e oder jiingere Entwicklungsstuf e bekannt i'st .
Da i s t d i e g r 6 s s t e S o r g f a l t e r f o r d e r l i c h , d a s s s i c h n i c h t s
F r e m d a r t i g e s einmische. Nach d i e s e r S e i t e h i n h a t g e r a d e
d i e h i s t o r i s c h e Sprachforschung v i e 1 g e s k d i g t , indem s i e
d a s , w a s s i e a u s d e r Erforschung d e s Z l t e r e n Sprachzustandes
a b s t r a h i e r t h a t , e i n f a c h auf den jiingeren i i b e r t r a g e n h a t .
( P a u l , 1909 [=I8861 :31) .
One c a n - h a r d l y t h i n k of a c l e a r e r s t a t e m e n t concerning t h e concept of t h e
language s t a t e and t h e problems of i t s d e s c r i p t i o n ; S a u s s u r e ' s famous
demand c o u l d h a r d l y have been a n t i c i p a t e d more e x p l i c i t l y :

A u s s i l e l i n g u i s t e q u i v e u t comprendre c e t 6 t a t [ d e l a n g u e ]
d o i t - i l f a i r e t a b l e r a s e de t o u t c e q u i l ' a produit e t
ignorer l a diachronie. (CLG, 117; CLG(E), 1 8 1 ) .

I n view of o u r f i n d i n g s 0 . D i t t r i c h ' s complaint of 1905 ( w i t h

r e f e r e n c e t o P a u l ) t h a t t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of l i n g u i s t i c s w i t h h i s t o r i c a l
l i n g u i s t i c s had by now become a k i n d of dogma a p p e a r s t o b e e x a g g e r a t e d ,
and i s a n i n d i c a t i o n of t h e f a c t t h a t even a c a r e f u l r e a d e r l i k e D i t t -
r i c h must h a v e overlooked a number of t h o s e s t a t e m e n t s by P a u l (and
43
many of h i s contemporaries)which permit a d i f f e r e n t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n .

J
 I n l g l O , when S a u s s u r e was p r e p a r i n g h i s most d e c i s i v e t h i r d c o u r s e
on g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s , K. von httmayer, a p u p i l of Meyer-Liibke, devoted
a n a r t i c l e t o t h e problem of whether a s c i e n t i f i c d e s c r i p t i v e grammar
44
i s n e c e s s a r y , a q u e s t i o n which h e answered i n t h e a f f i r m a t i v e , and
i n t h e subsequent y e a r V. Mathesius o u t l i n e d t h e p r o c e d u r e s f o r a des-
c r i p t i v e i n c o n t r a s t t o a n h i s t o r i c a l approach t o language. 45 A l l these
f a c t s p o i n t t o what we h a v e b e e n t r y i n g t o demonstrate, namely t h a t
t h e concept of 'synchrony' was v e r y much ' i n t h e a i r ' d u r i n g S a u s s u r e ' s
l i f e t i m e , and t h a t t h e o n l y t h i n g which was needed was a s y n t h e s i s and
a r i g o r o u s f o r m u l a t i o n of how t h e o t h e r p r i n c i p l e s , such a s t h e language
s t a t e , t h e s y s t e m a t i c n a t u r e of language, and t h e c h a r a c t e r of t h e
l i n g u i s t i c s i g n , f i t t e d i n t o t h e t h e o r y which i s r i g h t l y c a l l e d Saus-
surean. The f o l l o w i n g c h a p t e r i s an a t t e m p t i n t h i s d i r e c t i o n .
 FOOTNOTES 2.2.2/2.2.2.1

*
S. "Semantics a t t h e Cross-Roads", Universities Quarterzy 12:
.
250-60 (1958) ; r e p r . i n S Ullmann, Language and S t y l e : CoZZected Essays
(Oxford: Blackwell; New York: Barnes & Noble, 1964), 3-16, a t p. 4.

The o n l y e a r l i e r s t a t e m e n t i n which t h e a u t h o r s p e a k s of " t h e

almost 'Copernican r e v o l u t i o n ' i n l i n g u i s t i c s s i n c e d e S a u s s u r e ' s Cours"
a p p e a r s t o b e t h a t by P. A. Verburg i n Lingua 2:441 (1950).

I n p r i v a t e c o n v e r s a t i o n W. K. P e r c i v a l s u g g e s t e d t h a t t h e recog-
n i t i o n of FdS a s ' f a t h e r of modern l i n g u i s t i c s ' and t h e a s s o c i a t i o n
of h i s name w i t h s t r u c t u r a l i s m ( a l t h o u g h h e d i d n o t a t t a c h any s i g n i -
f i c a n t importance t o t h e t e r m ' s t r u c t u r e ' ) may w e l l b e due t o s p e c i f i c
h i s t o r i c a l ( i n c l u d i n g p o l i t i c a l , we presume) and s o c i a l c a u s e s . The
f a c t t h a t FdS gained world-wide r e c o g n i t i o n o n l y a f t e r t h e Second World
War seems t o s u p p o r t t h i s c l a i m . We may a l s o r e f e r t o E. Haugen's
P r e s i d e n t i a l a d d r e s s of 1950, i n which h e a d v i s e d t h e American l i n g u i s -
t i c p u b l i c t o s e r i o u s l y a c q u a i n t themselves w i t h t h e work of European
s c h o l a r s , n o t a b l y S a u s s u r e ; c f . " ~ i r e c t i o n si n Modern L i n g u i s t i c s " ,
Language 27:211-22 (1951); r e p r . i n RCL I, 357-63.
We would draw a t t e n t i o n t o t h e f a c t t h a t S t e i n t h a l , G. von d e r
Gabelentz, BdC, Kruszewski, L a z a r u s , M i s t e l i , Potebnj a , and many more a r e
n o t even mentioned once i n P e d e r s e n ' s Linguistic Science i n the 19th
.
Century ( c f t h e i n d e x o f Pedersen, 1962: 343-52) .
Although p u b l i s h e d f o r
t h e f i r s t t i m e i n 1924, Pedersen makes no mention of e i t h e r P a u l ' s P K n z i -
' pien (which had i t s 5 t h ed. i n 1920) o r t h e Corns (which had i t s second
ed. i n 1922), major p o r t i o n s of which t r e a t h i s t o r i c a l problems of langu-
age study.

S e e CLG, 193-260 ( ' L i n g u i s t i q u e d i a c h r o n i q u e ' ) , 261-89 ('Lin-

g u i s t i q u e g60graphique ') , and 291-312 ( ' L i n g u i s t i q u e r 6 t r o s p e c t i v e 1 ) .
I n a d d i t i o n , t h e e d i z o r s used o n l y a l i m i t e d p o r t i o n of FdS's l e c t u r e s
on t h e s e m a t t e r s .

Cf. M. Joos ' o b s e r v a t i o n of 1957 (RiL I , 1 8 ) . A s a t y p i c a l

example of r a t h e r s u p e r f i c i a l a c q u a i n t a n c e w i t h FdS and t h e impact
of h i s t h e o r y n o t e H. A. G l e a s o n ' s account of 1965: "Ferdinand d e
S a u s s u r e was a l e a d i n g f i g u r e i n t h e French-speaking [!I c o u n t r i e s i n
t h e e a r l y y e a r s of t h i s c e n t u r y . Though h e p u b l i s h e d l i t t l e , h e was
a v e r y p r o v o c a t i v e and i n s p i r i n g t e a c h e r . I n 1911 [!I h e d e l i v e r e d
a [ ! ] c o u r s e of l e c t u r e s on g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s which p a r t i c u l a r l y
f i r e d t h e i m a g i n a t i o n of h i s h e a r e r s . S h o r t l y t h e r e a f t e r , h e d i e d .
A group of h i s s t u d e n t s r e c o n s t r u c t e d h i s l e c t u r e s from t h e i r [!I c l a s s
n o t e s and p u b l i s h e d them i n 1916 .... De S a u s s u r e ' s l e c t u r e s a r e
c e r t a i n l y t h e most i m p o r t a n t s i n g l e European p u b l i c a t i o n i n l i n g u i s t i c s
i n t h i s c e n t u r y . (The q u a l i f i c a t i o n 'European' may b e o n l y a b i t of
American p r o v i n c i a l i s m ! ) . Every [ ! I subsequent worker on t h e C o n t i n e n t
[ ! ] h a s been i n f l u e n c e d by them, some v e r y h e a v i l y . " (Linguistics and
English Grammar [New York: H o l t , R i n e h a r t & Winston, 19651, 45-6).
Gleason n o t e s t h a t t h e CLG "is o b s c u r e a t some v e r y i m p o r t a n t p l a c e s "
w i t h o u t g i v i n g any examples and i g n o r e s t h e i n f l u e n c e of t h e Cours on
Bloomfield which was n o t n e g l i g i b l e a s we have r e c e n t l y p o i n t e d o u t
( c f . Language 47:449f. , n o t e [ l 9 7 l ] ) .
6 We r e f e r t o t h e p a p e r s by Heinimann, T e l e g d i and L i e b , a l l of 1967.

S. Festgabe Hans von Greyerz zwn sechzigsten Geburtstug (Berne:

H. Lang, 1967), 783-807. Cf. a l s o M. Leroy, "Sur l e c o n c e p t d l & o l u -
t i o n en l i n g u i s t i q u e " , RIS 22:337-75 (1949).

T e l e g d i , " S t r u k t u r und G e s c h i c h t e : Zur Auffassung i h r e s V e r h P l t -

n i s s e s i n d e r Sprachwissenschaft", ALHung 17:223-43 (1967); c f . a l s o h i s
a r t i c l e s , "Uber d i e Entzweiung d e r Sprachwissenschaft", i b i d . , 12:95-107
(1962), and "Zur G e s c h i c h t e d e r S p r a c h w i s s e n s c h a f t ( ' H i s t o r i s c h e Gram-
m a t i k ' ) ", i b i d . 16: 225-37 (1966). The paper by t h e same a u t h o r i n To
Honor Roman Jakobson 111, 1996-2005 (1967) c o n s t i t u t e s a s h o r t e n e d v e r -
s i o n of h i s 1966 a r t i c l e .

Cf. P a u l , 1909:l. This p a s s a g e from t h e opening p a r a g r a p h of

t h e Prinzipien i s i d e n t i c a l w i t h t h a t of t h e 1st ed. of 1880 and was
never changed.

lo It i s t h e r e f o r e n o t s u r p r i s i n g t h a t t h e voluminous c o m p i l a t i o n
of l i n g u i s t i c l i t e r a t u r e from i t s e a r l y b e g i n n i n g s t o t h e s t a r t of t h e
184Os, Litteratur der Gramatiken, Lexika und Wi;rtersammZungen der Erde
by Johann S e v e r i n V a t e r (1771-1826), 2nd completely r e v . and much e n l .
ed., p r e p a r e d by Bernhard ~ G l g(1825-86), which appeared i n 1847 ( B e r l i n :
N i c o l a i ; r e p r . Graz: Akad. Druck- und V e r l a g s a n s t a l t , 1970) does n o t
mention B e r n h a r d i ' s t h e o r e t i c a l work i n l i n g u i s t i c s among t h e some s i x
thousand t i t l e s b u t o n l y h i s grammars of Greek (p. 148) and L a t i n (p. 220).

l1 Cf. Einleitung i n das Studiwn der indogernanisehen Sprachen,

4 t h r e v . ed. (Leipzig: B r e i t k o p f & ~ z r t e l ,1904). ~ e l b r k k ' sf o r m u l a t i o n s
i n t h i s c o n n e c t i o n a r e v e r y r e v e a l i n g and s u p p o r t t h e s p e c i f i c k i n d of
history i n "historical linguistics": "Als Prinzip der h i s t o r i s c h e n
Ansicht kann man h i n s t e l l e n , d a s s d i e Sprache ... s i c h nach notwen-
d i g e n Gesetzen e n t w i c k e l t , a b e r b e w u s s t l o s , und nach eben s o l c h e n b l i i h t
und wieder v e r g e h t . Die p h i l o s o p h i s c h e dagegen h a t e s m i t etwas Gege-
benem und F e r t i g e n zu t u n . " (P. 29; t h i s p a s s a g e i s n o t i n c l u d e d i n
.
e a r l i e r e d i t i o n s of D e l b r k k ' s EinZeitung ) D e l b r k k does n o t merely
r e l a t e pronouncements of Bernhardi b u t i n t e r p r e t s them i n h i s own neo-
grammarian u n d e r s t a n d i n g of B e r n h a r d i .
 l2 See Grundriss der germanisehen PhiZoZogie ed. by H. P a u l , v o l .
I, 2nd r e v . ed. ( S t r a s s b u r g : K. ,J. Triibner, 1901), 9-158.

l3 For a n i n t e r e s t i n g account of Comte's p o s i t i v i s m and i t s i n -

f l u e n c e on subsequent g e n e r a t i o n s i n t h e s o c i a l and moral s c i e n c e s ,
s. Robin G. Collingwood, The Idea of History (Oxford: Clarendon, 1946;
r e p r . l 9 6 7 ) , 126-34, e s p . pp. 129-31.

l4 See a l s o CLG(E) , 357 ( n o t e s by R i e d l i n g e r from FdS's f i r s t

c o u r s e ) , i n which t h e term ' l i n g u i s t i q u e 6 v o l u t i v e ' o c c u r s e x p l i c i t l y .

l5 See Einfiihrung ...

(Heidelberg: C . Winter, 1 9 0 1 ) , p. 56;
2nd r e v . e d . , 1909, p. 62. (We d i s r e g a r d t h e 3 r d ed. of 1920 which i n
a number of r e s p e c t s shows i n t e r e s t i n g changes, c f . L i e b , 1967:24;
Heinimann, 19 67 :801) .
l6 Schuchardt made t h e f o l l o w i n g s t a t e m e n t i n t h e opening p a r a g r a p h
of h i s paper, " ~ h o n 6 t i q u ecomparge. I. Les m o d i f i c a t i o n s s y n t a c t i q u e s
d e l a consonne i n i t i a l e dans l e s d i a l e c t e s d e l a S a r d a i g n e , du c e n t r e
e t du sud d e l ' I t a l i e t t , Romania 3:l-30 (1874): "Rien n e c o n t r i b u e r a i t
p l u s , s u i v a n t moi, aux p r o g r & d e s g t u d e s l i n g u i s t i q u e s que d e pour-
s u i v r e sgpar6ment chacune d e s d i r e c t i o n s dans l e s q u e l l e s e l l e s s ' g t e n -
d e n t , d'examiner 2 p a r t , s i l ' o n p e u t s 'exprimer a i n s i , l a coupe v e r t i -
c a l e e t l a coupe h o r i z o n t a l e d e l a langue." (Also r e p r i n t e d i n Hugo
Schuchardt-Breuier, p. 328) .
l7EinfGhrung in das Studiwn der romanischen Sprachwissenschaft
(Heidelberg: C. Winter, 1901; 2nd r e v . ed., 1909), 55 (= 59 i n 2nd e d . ) .
Note t h a t t h i s s t a t e m e n t i s made i n t h e f i r s t paragraph of t h e second
p a r t e n t i t l e d "Die Auf gaben d e r romanischen Sprachwiss enschaf t".

l8 "Biologische Aufgaben" and 1tPa150ntologische Auf gaben", op. cit .,

2nd ed., 63-94, and 95-225 r e s p e c t i v e l y . Meyer-Liibke's s t a t e m e n t s i n
t h e p r e f a c e ,to t h e 2nd ed. of 1909 c o n c e r n i n g t h e " d o p p e l t e Betrachtung"
of l i n g u i s t i c phenomena s h o u l d n o t b e i n t e r p r e t e d as a n i n d i c a t i o n
of h i s p l e a f o r a h i s t o r i c a l and a d e s c r i p t i v e approach.

l9 On p. 1 of t h e " ~ i t e r a t u r a n g a b e n " t h i s book i s l i s t e d t o g e t h e r

w i t h t h e works of D e l b r k k , P a u l , and o t h e r s which a r e concerned w i t h
g e n e r a l q u e s t i o n s of language s t u d y , among them P h i l i p p Wegener's
(1848-1916) Untersuchungen iiber die Grundfragen des SpraehZebens ( H a l l e l
S.: M. Niemeyer, 1 8 8 5 ) , a book which was l a r g e l y i g n o r e d by h i s contem-
p o r a r i e s b u t h i g h l y esteemed by A. H. G a r d i n e r and J. R. F i r t h ( c f . PiL,
181f.) i n our century.

.
20 Cf Indogermanisehe Sprachwissenschaft, 3 r d r e v . ed . (Leipzig :
G. J. G k c h e n , 1903), p . 1 2 .

21 Apart from P a u l and Gab e l e n t z ( c f 1.3.4.2.2), . t h e r e i s Bruno

L i e b i c h ' s s t a t e m e n t of 1899 t o t h i s e f f e c t i n IF 10:364-5 a s M. S c h e l l e r
s u g g e s t e d i n h i s p a p e r , " ' L i n g u i s t i q u e s y n c h r o n i q u e ' und ' l i n g u i s t i q u e
 31 Cf. versuch, 188-94. Masaryk c o n t r a s t s l i n g u i s t i c s ("Sprach-
forschung") w i t h p h i l o l o g y ("PhLlologie"), whose main concern i s w i t h
l i t e r a t u r e arid c i v i l i z a t i o n , t r e a t i n g i t s e p a r a t e l y under t h e main h e a d i n g
of "Die h i s t o r i s c h und k u n s t l i c h o r g a n i s i e r t e n Wissenschaften", pp.
238-46.

32 It was i n p a r t i c u l a r t h e Swiss s c h o l a r O t t o Funke (b. 1885) who

r e p e a t e d l y claimed t h a t F. Brentano and A. Marty had a n t i c i p a t e d FdS's
synchrony/diachrony d i s t i n c t i o n by d i s t i n g u i s h i n g , i n p s y c h o l o g i c a l
m a t t e r s , between d e s c r i p t i v e and g e n e t i c c o n s i d e r a t i o n s . Cf. Funke,
Innere Sprachform: Eine ~infiihrungi n A. Marty s Sprachphi Zosophie
(Reichenberg i. B r . : Kraus, 1 9 2 4 ) , pp. 20 and 25, and idem ( e d . ) , Anton
Marty: NachgeZassene Schriften, v o l . I: Psyche und Sprachstruktw (Berne:
A. Francke, 1940; 2nd ed., 1 9 6 5 ) , pp. l l f . See a l s o E. L e r c h ' s remark
t o a s i m i l a r e f f e c t i n NSpr 42:376 (1934), and t h o s e who f o l l o w e d Funke's
c o n t e n t i o n s , e;g. Malmberg, 1 9 6 4 ~ 3 6 ;D e Mauro, 1968:351; and, f o l l o w i n g
Lerch ( ? ) , I v i c , 1965:113, n. 1. Funke and Lerch f a i l e d t o g i v e any
t e x t u a l e v i d e n c e i n s u p p o r t of t h e i r c l a i m s , and we t u r n e d up l i t t l e i n
f a v o u r of them; c f . Brentano, PsychoZogie vom empirisehen Standpunkt
ed., w i t h an i n t r o d . , a n n o t a t i o n s , and a n index, by Oskar Kraus, v o l .
I (Leipzig: F. Meiner, 1924; r e p r . Hamburg: i b i d . , 1 9 5 5 ) , e s p . pp. x v i i f f . ,
2 5 5 f and 263 [ l s t ed., 18741, and a l s o L i e b , 1967:19; Marty, Gesamelte
Schrzften, v o l . I , p a r t 2, ed. by J o s e f Eisenmeier, A l f r e d K a s t i l , and
Oskar Kraus ( H a l l e / ~ :. M. Niemeyer, l 9 l 6 ) , 235-6 where Marty made a .
remark r e g a r d i n g t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between d e s c r i p t i v e and g e n e t i c a s p e c t s
i n a p a p e r of 1891, a remark r e p e a t e d , w i t h r e f e r e n c e t o language s t u d y ,
i n h i s Untersuchungen zur Grundlegung der AZZgemeinen Gramrnatik und
SprachphiZosophie ( ~ a l l e / S . : M. Niemeyer, 1 9 0 8 ) , p. 222.
33 Notes inBdites de FdS, No. 1 0 , p. 14a; cf SM, 34 and 45, and .
Godel, 1968: 117. Note t h a t < > i n c l u d e c o r r e c t i o n s and m a r g i n a l n o t e s
made by FdS i n t h e manuscript ( c f . CLG(E), x i i ) .
34
See h i s p a p e r , "L'Inde a n t i q u e e t l e s o r i g i n e s du s t r u c t u r a l i s m e " ,
A[lO]CIL 11, 235-40 (1970).
35 See BdC, "Einige F i l l e d e r Wirkung d e r Analogie i n d e r p o l n i s c h e n
D e k l i n a t i o n " , BVSpr 6:19-88 (1870), s i g n e d "Jena, F e b r u a r 1868", where
BdC was a p u p i l of S c h l e i c h e r , a f a c t which e x p l a i n s a t l e a s t p a r t l y
t h e t o p i c and BdC1s p r e d i l e c t i o n f o r t h e l i v i n g languages. ~ g u s l e r ' s
dictum: "Baudouins V o r l i e b e f G r d i e lebenden Sprachen f i i h r t e n i c h t w i e
b e i d e S a u s s u r e zu e i n e r Vernachl&sigung d e s h i s t o r i s c h e n Aspekts d e r
Sprachel' (1968: 44) i s v e r y m i s l e a d i n g , s i n c e t h e r e can b e no doubt t h a t
FdS devoted much more a t t e n t i a n t o h i s t o r i c a l l i n g u i s t i c s t h a n BdC e v e r
did.

36 HPusler (1968: 63) r e p o r t s t h a t Baudouin d i s t i n g u i s h e d f u r t h e r ,

i n an a r t i c l e f o r t h e P o l i s h Encyclopedia of 1899, between dynamic and
h i s t o r i c a l a s p e c t s of language, a v e r y u s e f u l d i s t i n c t i o n i n d e e d , which
a p p e a r s n e v e r t o have reached S a u s s u r e who i n s i s t e d s o much on t h e ' s t a t i c '
i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of synchrony and does n o t seem t o h a v e allowed f o r a dynamic
p r i n c i p l e w i t h i n d e s c r i p t i v e l i n g u i s t i c s ( c f . Koerner, 1971:30).
 37 Techmer t r a n s l . Kruszewski's 0Zerk n a u k i o j a z y k e a s ' P r i n z i p i e n
d e r Sprachentwickelung' ( s . Kru'szewski, 1884-90).

38 Kruszewski s t u d i e d p a r t i c u l a r l y psychology and philosophy a t

Warsaw b e f o r e j o i n i n g BdC a t Kazan t o work i n l i n g u i s t i c s . I n h i s prin-
c i p a l s t u d y of 1883 Kruszewski r e f e r s t o Bain, L e i b n i z , M i l l , T a i n e ,
and o t h e r s c h o l a r s .

39 Kruszewski p o s i t s t h e e x i s t e n c e of "dynamische G e s e t z e d e s L a u t e s ,
d e s Lautsystems und d e r ~ a u t k o m ~ l e x e(1887:149;
" spaced i n t h e o r i g i n a l ) ;
h e a l s o d i s t i n g u i s h e d b etween "Thatsachen d e r Ordnung d e r Koemk t e n z "
and "Thatsachen d e r Reihe d e r Konsequenz" (l887:159), a d i s t i n c t i o n which
merits attention.

40 Cf. Kruszewski, 1884:301-307 [passim]; 1885:262f. , 268; 1887:

l 4 8 f . , 157, l6Of., 172; 1890: 134, 135, 137, 138, 139 ["Formensysteme"] ,
140, 339-47 [ p a s s i m ] , 358, and 360. See a l s o Kruszewski's o b s e r v a t i o n
about t h e " e i n h e i t l i c h e UmgestaZtung des Lautsystems" (1887: 161) . Note
t h a t Kruszewski used t h e term " S t r u k t u r " on s e v e r a l o c c a s i o n s , e . g .
1885:262 ["Struktureigenschaften"l, 1887:174 [ t w i c e ] , 1890:134.

.
41 Cf a l s o 1890 :136 [ "Zus t a n d d e r Sprache"] , and Krus zewski 's r e -
mark a b o u t t h e "gegenwzrtige G e s t a l t " of a g i v e n language (1890:143).

42 S. h i s a d d r e s s , "Sprachwissenachaf t und P h i l o l o g i e : Eine akade-

mische A n t r i t t s v o r l e s u n g " , i n K. Brugmann, Zum h e u t i g e n S t a n d d e r Sprach-
w i s s e n s c h a f t ( S t r a s s b u r g : K. J. Triibner, 1885), 3-41, a t p. 18. Note
t h a t " s t a t i s t i s c h " means ' s t a t i c ' ( c f . L i e b , 1967:22, n . 11 f o r examples
of t h i s usage i n 1 8 t h c e n t u r y G.).

43 Cf. o u r a t t e m p t t o r e s t o r e P a u l ' s t h e o r y of language t o i t s

p r o p e r p l a c e , "Hermann P a u l and Synchronic L i n g u i s t i c s " , t o a p p e a r i n
Lingua. For D i t t r i c h ' s o b s e r v a t i o n , s . h i s e s s a y , Die Grenzen d e r
. .
S p r a c h w i s s e n s c h a f t ( L e i p z i g : B G. Teubner , 1905) , p 5.

44 Cf. "Bengtigen w i r e i n e w i s s e n s c h a f t l i c h d e s k r i p t i v e Grammatik?"

F e s t s c h r . Meyer-Liibke, P a r t I ( ~ a l l e / S . : M. Niemeyer, 1 9 1 0 ) , 1-16.

45 Cf. t h e E. t r a n s l . , "On t h e P o t e n t i a l i t y of t h e Phenomena of

Language", Prague School Reader, 1-32 (1964) . . J Vachek, t h e t r a n s l . of
t h e a r t i c l e , must b e c r i t i c i z e d f o r adding " s y n c h r o n i s t i c " and "dia-
c h r o n i s t i c " i n b r a c k e t s t o M a t h e s i u s ' terms of s t a t i c and dynamic ( c f .
Zoc. c i t . , pp. 1, 8 , 30, 3 1 ) , s i n c e t h e s e terms a r e by no means iden-
tical.
2.2.2.2 The I n t e r p r e t a t i o n of S a u s s u r e ' s D i s t i n c t i o n between
Synchronic and ~ i a c h r o r h cL i n g u i s t i c s

... quand on fera pour Za premi2re

fois une thgorie vraie de Za langue,
un des tout premiers principes qu 'on
y inscrira e s t que jamais, en aucun
cas, une &gZe qui a pour caract2re
de se mouvoir dans un 6 t a t d e l a n g u e
(= entre 2 t e m e s contemporains), et
non dans un 6vGnement p h o n g t i q u e (=
2 termes successifs) ne peut avoir
pZus qu 'une validitG de hasard.
F. d e S a u s s u r e i n 1897 (IFAnz 7:217)

F. de Saussure vouZait surtout bien

marquer Ze contraste entre deux ma-
nizres de considzrer Zes f a i t s Zin-
guis tiques : Z 'Ztude de Za Zangue 2
un moment don&, e t Z 'Gtude du d&e-
Zoppement Zinguis tique 2 travers Ze
temps.
Antoine M e i l l e t i n 1913 (LHLG 11, 183)

To t h e astonishment of t h e a n a l y s t perhaps ( c f . SM, 157) b u t n o t

n e c e s s a r i l y t o t h e h i s t o r i a n of l i n g u i s t i c s c i e n c e S a u s s u r e developed
h i s d i s t i n c t i o n between a d e s c r i p t i v e approach and t h e h i s t o r i c a l t r e a t -
ment of language much e a r l i e r t h a n h i s d i s t i n c t i o n between Zangue and
parole ( c f . 2.2.1.2), d e s p i t e t h e f a c t t h a t , from a s t r i c t l y t h e o r e t i c a l
p o i n t of view, t h e d e f i n i t i o n of language a s t h e p r o p e r o b j e c t of l i n -
g u i s t i c s i s t h e condicio sine qwz non f o r a r i g o r o u s d i s c r i m i n a t i o n
between t h e two manners of d e a l i n g w i t h l i n g u i s t i c phenomena. The
t h e o r e t i c i a n of today t e n d s t o f o r g e t , however, t h a t S a u s s u r e was a n
h e i r of t h e l i n g u i s t i c t r a d i t i o n p r e v a i l i n g i n h i s own t i m e and could
n o t s e e a l l t h e r a m i f i c a t i o n s of h i s t h e o r y i n t h e way t h e post-Saus-
s u r e a n , who h a s w i t n e s s e d t h e d i s c u s s i o n of t h e problems r a i s e d i n t h e
284
Cows d u r i n g t h e p a s t f i f t y y e a r s , i s a b l e t o do. I n much t h e same
way, Copernicus who s e t t h e corAerstone f o r t h e new e d i f i c e on which
modern u n d e r s t a n d i n g of t h e s o l a r system r e s t s , d i d n o t s o l v e many of
t h e problems c r e a t e d by h i s r e j e c t i o n of t h e g e o c e n t r i c view of t h e uni-
v e r s e , and i t was l e f t t o Kepler, G a l i l e i , and o t h e r s c i e n t i s t s t o prove,
b y t h e way of o b s e r v a t i o n and experiment, t h e c o r r e c t n e s s of h i s c l a i m s
( c f . Kuhn, 1970: 68-9). By t h e same token t h e concept of 'paradigm'
r e v e a l s i t s e l f a s a t l e a s t ambivalent i n i t s i m p l i c a t i o n . The f i r s t
meaning of paradigm may b e termed t h e "shared example", a s Kuhn (1970:
187) s u g g e s t s ; t h i s i s p a r t i c u l a r l y t r u e f o r S a u s s u r e ' s synchrony/dia-
chrony d i s t i n c t i o n which, a s w e have i l l u s t r a t e d above (2.2.2.1), was
a n o t i o n c u r r e n t among l i n g u i s t s between 1880 and 1910. The o t h e r s e n s e
i n which 'paradigm' a p p e a r s s i n g u l a r l y a p p r o p r i a t e i s concerned w i t h
t h e c r e a t i v e a c t of c o d i f i c a t i o n of what was f e l t , h a l f - c o n s c i o u s l y
p r a c t i s e d , and more c a s u a l l y t h a n s t r i c t 0 sensu r e f e r r e d t o , i n o r d e r
t o p r e s e n t a n u l t i m a t e l y new approach, a new frame of r e f e r e n c e , s o t o
speak.
S a u s s u r e ' s a s s o c i a t i o n w i t h t h e n e o g r a m a r i a n movement i s a w e l l -
known f a c t , b u t i t h a s f r e q u e n t l y been f o r g o t t e n t h a t S a u s s u r e t a u g h t
most of t h e languages of t h e Indo-European branch throughout h i s academic
career. I n a d d i t i o n , h e p u b l i s h e d n o t h i n g on problems r e l a t e d t o g e n e r a l
l i n g u i s t i c s , a l t h o u g h , f o r t h e g r e a t e r p a r t of h i s l i f e , t h e s e i d e a s
occupied h i s mind.' The f i r s t p r e s e r v e d l e t t e r of S a u s s u r e from a
c o r r e s p o n d e n c e w i t h h i s former p u p i l M e i l l e t , which covered t h e p e r i o d
from 1894 t o 1911, i s r e v e a l i n g i n a number of r e s p e c t s ( c f . a l s o 1 . 1 ) .
I n t h i s l e t t e r of January 4, 1894, S a u s s u r e e x p r e s s e d t h e " ~ e i t m o t i v
i n d e r ~ e t h o d e n k l a ~ e " . But i n a d d i t i o n t o S a u s s u r e 's complaint about
t h e membra d i s i e c t a and t h e " i n e p t i e a b s o l u e d e l a t e r m i n o l o g i e cour-
ante", t h e r e a r e two a s p e c t s which a r e of p a r t i c u l a r i n t e r e s t t o t h e
present discussion: 1 ) S a u s s u r e r e c o g n i z e s t h e immense work t h a t would
h a v e t o b e done t o show what t h e l i n g u i s t i s a c t u a l l y d o i n g , and 2) h e
e x p r e s s e s h i s " p l a i s i r h i s t o r i q u e " which h e f e e l s h a s been s p o i l e d by
3
t h e f a c t t h a t no one h a s c l a r i f i e d t h e n a t u r e of language i n g e n e r a l .
Both o b s e r v a t i o n s a r e of importance f o r t h e u n d e r s t a n d i n g of S a u s s u r e
I

and t h e a p p r e c i a t i o n of h i s c o n t r i b u t i o n t o l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y . Firstly,
S a u s s u r e emphasizes t h e importance of t h e l i n g u i s t ' s awareness of t h e
procedures t o b e employed i n a n a l y z i n g language. I n another manuscript
of 1894 h e r e i t e r a t e d t h e n e c e s s i t y f o r a b s t r a c t i o n t o d e t e r m i n e "ce
qu 'on fa it^.^ we have s e e n i n t h e p r e c e d i n g c h a p t e r ( s . 2.2.2.1) that
t h e synchrony/diachrony d i s t i n c t i o n was a n o t i o n c u r r e n t i n S a u s s u r e ' s
time; we have a l s o p o i n t e d o u t , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n t h e c h a p t e r on P a u l
( c f . 1.3.2.2.1), t h a t l i n g u i s t s of t h e time d i d u n d e r r a t e t h e v a l u e
of d e s c r i p t i v e l i n g u i s t i c s and tended t o r e j e c t t h i s approach a s un-
s c i e n t i f i c a d m i t t i n g i t t o b e mainly a h e u r i s t i c d e v i c e which w i l l f a c i -
l i t a t e t h e work o f t h e h i s t o r i c a l l i n g u i s t . Secondly, S a u s s u r e makes h i s
p r e d i l e c t i o n f o r t h e h i s t o r i c a l t r e a t m e n t of language dependent on t h e
5
c l e a r d e f i n i t i o n of language as t h e o b j e c t of l i n g u i s t i c i n v e s t i g a t i o n .
S a u s s u r e was a t t h a t t i m e d i s c o u r a g e d a b o u t t h e p r o s p e c t s of s u c c e s s f o r
such c l a r i f i c a t i o n s and s o l u t i o n s of t h e problems h e e n v i s a g e d , and
t h e r e a r e i n d i c a t i o n s t h a t h e abandoned r e f l e c t i o n on g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c
problems soon t h e r e a f t e r , and d i d n o t t a k e them up a g a i n b e f o r e h e was
6
commissioned t o t e a c h on g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s i n December 1906.
It i s c u r i o u s t o n o t e t h a t Godel's S o u r c e s m a n u s c r i t e s , t h e b u l k
of which i s devoted t o t h e d i s c u s s i o n and i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of S a u s s u r e ' s
g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y b a s e d on n o t e s by S a u s s u r e h i m s e l f and on
t h o s e t a k e n by s t u d e n t s d u r i n g h i s l e c t u r e s , does n o t t r e a t t h e synchrony/
d i a c h r o n y d i s t i n c t i o n i n a s e p a r a t e c h a p t e r a s t h e y do f o r a number of
other topics.7 R e f e r e n c e s t o t h i s dichotomy, however, can b e found on
s e v e r a l o c c a s i o n s throughout t h e s t u d y , b u t nowhere does Godel appear
t o have s e e n p a r t i c u l a r problems i n v o l v e d i n i t s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . Never-
t h e l e s s h e does a n a l y z e S a u s s u r e ' s e a r l y pronouncements on t h i s d i s -
t i n c t i o n which can b e d a t e d back t o t h e y e a r 1894 a s f a r a s t e x t u a l
documentation i s a v a i l a b l e . I n a p a p e r , e n t i t l e d somewhat m i s l e a d i n g l y
"Origine d e l a l i n g u i s t i q u e synchronique de Saussure", E. Buyssens h a s
p o i n t e d o u t t h a t S a u s s u r e conceived of a s y n c h r o n i c l i n g u i s t i c s a s
b e i n g b a s e d e n t i r e l y on t h e n o t i o n of system i n language (CFS 1 8 : 2 1 ) .
I f t h i s i s t r u e we could f o l l o w h i s s u g g e s t i o n and t h e o b s e r v a t i o n s of
C. V a l l i n i (1969:66ff.) t o conclude t h a t S a u s s u r e conceived of a syn-
c h r o n i c approach t o language as' e a r l y a s 1878 when h e completed h i s
8
famous ~ z m o i r e . The q u e s t i o n remains, however, whether S a u s s u r e was
a t t h a t time aware of t h e consequences and i m p l i c a t i o n s of h i s s t e p
towards e s t a b l i s h i n g t h e v o c a l i c system of t h e Indo-European p r o t o -
language.' But, a s Buyssens (CFS 18: 1 8 f f .) h a s demonstrated, t h e con-
c e p t of system i s a s o l d a s t h e s t u d y of grammar, and i t a p p e a r s doubt-
f u l whether S a u s s u r e h a d , i n 1878, reached c o n c l u s i o n s comparable t o
t h o s e made by P a u l two y e a r s l a t e r i n h i s P r i n z i p i e n :

Wie w i r iiberhaupt nach einem gewissen D u r c h s c h n i t t d a s i n

e i n e r bestimmten P e r i o d e a l l g e m e i n % l i e h e d a r s t e l l e n , s o
s i n d w i r auch i m s t a n d e fiir j e d e Entwickelungsperiode e i n e r
Sprache e i n i m w e s e n t l i c h e n aZZgemeingiiZtiges Sgstem d e r
Gruppierung [ o f l i n g u i s t i c e l e m e n t s ] a u f z u s t e l l e n . Gerade
n u r d a s Allgemeine, i m Wesen d e r Elemente, a u s denen s i c h
d i e Gruppen zusammensetzen, Begriindete i s t e s , woran s i c h
d i e w i s s e n s c h a f t l i c h e B e t r a c h t u n g h a l t e n kann, wghrend d i e
i n d i v i d u e l l e n B e s o n d e r h e i t e n , von e i n z e l n e n , i n d e r g r o s -
s e n Masse verschwindenden Ausnahmen abgesehen, s i c h d e r
Beobachtung e n t z i e h e n . (1880:78 = 1909:189; our i t a l i c s ) .

P a u l h i m s e l f d i d n o t conclude from t h i s s u r p r i s i n g l y e x p l i c i t s t a t e m e n t
t h a t d e s c r i p t i v e grammar s h o u l d h a v e a s t a t u s comparable t o h i s t o r i c a l
l i n g u i s t i c s ( c f . 1.3.2.2) b u t one may w e l l a s k whether S a u s s u r e had
n o t b e e n induced t o draw t h i s c o n c l u s i o n a f t e r having r e a d t h i s s t a t e m e n t .
A t any r a t e , i n h i s f i r s t l e c t u r e s of 1891 a t t h e U n i v e r s i t y of
Geneva, S a u s s u r e g r a p p l e d w i t h t h e problem of language and i t s r e l a t i o n
t o t h e o t h e r ( s o c i a l ) s c i e n c e s ( s . SM, 3 7 ) , b u t h e s t i l l c o n t i n u e s t o
affirm:

Tout dans l a l a n g u e e s t h i s t o i r e , c'est-;-dire e l l e e s t un

o b j e t d ' a n a l y s e h i s t o r i q u e , e t non d ' a n a l y s e a b s t r a i t e , q u '
e l l e s e compose d e f a i t s , e t non d e Zois, que t o u t c e q u i
semble o r g a n i q u e [ i . e . s y s t g m a t i q u e ] dans l a l a n g u e e s t e n
r 6 a l i t 6 c o n t i n g e n t e t compl2tement a c c i d e n t e l (SM, 38).

D e s p i t e t h i s a f f i r m a t i o n we f i n d t h a t S a u s s u r e s t a t e d i n t h e s u b s e q u e n t
l e s s o n t h a t , a l t h o u g h h e d e n i e s t h e e x i s t e n c e of permanent c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s
i n language, h e r e c o g n i z e s t h a t "il n'y a que des 6tats d e langue q u i
s o n t perp6tuellement l a t r a n s i t i o n e n t r e l ' g t a t de l a v e i l l e e t c e l u i
du lendemain" (our i t a l i c s ) , and n o t much l a t e r t h a t n o t o n l y t h e ex-
p l a n a t i o n b u t . i n f a c t t h e e x i s t e h c e of a p h o n e t i c f a c t presupposes two
epochs (SM, 3 9 ) . These o b s e r v a t i o n s however remain m a r g i n a l i n Saus-
s u r e ' s work of t h e e a r l y 1890s and do n o t seem t o d i f f e r from t h e a c c e p t e d
views expounded i n P a u l ' s Prinzipien.
I n h i s a p p r e c i a t i o n of Whitney's work w r i t t e n l a t e i n 1894, a
number of changes i n S a u s s u r e ' s argument can b e n o t i c e d . In dealing
w i t h l i n g u i s t i c change S a u s s u r e i n t r o d u c e d h i s now famous s i m i l e of
t h e game of chess.'' He charged t h a t e a r l i e r language t h e o r e t i c i a n s
and language p r a c t i t i o n e r s a f t e r Bopp had never ceased t o c o n s i d e r
language " c o m e UNE POSITION d'6checs" which had n e i t h e r b e g i n n i n g
n o r c o n t i n u a t i o n , whereas h i s t o r i c a l grammar had d i s c o v e r e d t h a t "DES
COUPS d'e'checs" do t a k e p l a c e b u t r e g a r d e d them e x c l u s i v e l y as such.
The r e s u l t was t h a t i t d i s t o r t e d t h e t r u e n a t u r e of language which
meant t h a t t h e comparison w i t h a game of c h e s s i s o n l y p a r t l y a d e q u a t e
s i n c e i n language t h e r e a r e a t t h e same t i m e b o t h ' p o s i t i o n s ' and 'moves ',
11
'changes' and ' s t a t e s ' (1894:lO = CLG(E), 1 9 8 ) . S a u s s u r e a l s o recog-
n i z e s , w h i l e acknowledging t h e f a c t t h a t language i s a t any g i v e n moment
a n h i s t o r i c a l p r o d u c t , t h a t t h e communicational mechanism cannot b e
e x p l a i n e d simply by c o n s i d e r a t i o n s of h i s t o r y b u t n e c e s s i t a t e s t h e
c r e a t i o n of a s c i e n c e of a d i f f e r e n t s o r t which h e c a l l s semiology.
Before t h i s "dualit; fondamentale" can b e understood t h e f a c t s of l a n -
guage remain c h i m e r i c a l ( c f . 1894:14a). Speaking of ' s t a t e s ' S a u s s u r e
contends t h a t i t would b e a misconception t o b e l i e v e t h a t one s t a t e pre-
cedes t h e o t h e r o r t h a t t h e e x p l a n a t i o n of a g i v e n s t a t e would b e f a c i l i -
t a t e d by t h e knowledge of t h e p r e v i o u s s t a g e (p. 1 6 ) . The independence
of one s t a t e (of language) from t h e o t h e r i s p o s t u l a t e d , and i n a s e c t i o n
e n t i t l e d "De l ' a n t i - h i s t o r i c i t ; du langage" (p. 2 9 ) , S a u s s u r e e x p a t i a t e s
on t h i s i d e a i n t h e f o l l o w i n g manner:

Dans une p a r t i e d'gchec, n ' i m p o r t e q u e l l e p o s i t i o n donnge a

pour c a r a c t s r e < s i n g u l i e r > d t G t r e a f f r a n c h e d e s a n t 6 c 6 d e n t s Y
c ' e s t - $ - d i r e q u ' i l n ' e s t pas ' p l u s ou moins' i n d i f f g r e n t ,
mais totalernent i n d i f f i r e n t qu'on < en < s o i t a r r i v g 2 < t e l l e >
p o s i t i o n p a r une v o i e ou p a r une a u t r e ; ... (p. 30; c f . SM,
45f. ; CLG(E) , 19 7) .
S a u s s u r e adds t h a t nobody would t h i n k of d e s c r i b i n g a p o s i t i o n by mixing
what i s w i t h what was, even i f t h e r e had been o n l y t e n seconds of d i f -
f e r e n c e between t h e two. I n S a u s s u r e ' s views t h e same a p p l i e s t o l a n -
guage, and t h e q u e s t i o n remaining i s i n which way c o u l d such an o b j e c t
of i n v e s t i g a t i o n b e h i s t o r i c a l . He does n o t r e s o l v e t h e problem b u t
p o i n t s i n s t e a d t o language a s a "s6miologie p a r t i c u l i & e W and emphasizes
t h a t t h e n a t u r e of language would n o t b e a d e q u a t e l y understood u n l e s s
t h i s " i r r i t a n t e d u p l i c i t 6 " was r e c o g n i z e d (p. 3 1 = CLG(E), 1 9 7 ) .
It i s worth n o t i n g t h a t S a u s s u r e i s v e r y much concerned i n t h i s
u n f i n i s h e d e s s a y of 1894 w i t h ''synchronic" a s p e c t s of language; t h e
term i t s e l f a p p e a r s t o have been c o i n e d a y e a r l a t e r ( c f . SM, 4 9 ) .
I n f a c t S a u s s u r e d e v o t e s s o much a t t e n t i o n t o t h e n o n - h i s t o r i c a l problems
of language, i n c l u d i n g t h e concept of t h e l i n g u i s t i c s i g n and t h e e s t a b -
l i s h m e n t of a semiology, t h a t h e seems t o f i n d i t d i f f i c u l t t o s a l v a g e
a n y t h i n g of t h e h i s t o r i c a l p o i n t of view. I n a d d i t i o n , a s is s o o f t e n
c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of new d i s c o v e r i e s , S a u s s u r e ' s f o r m u l a t i o n s t e n d t o b e
o v e r s t a t e d and somewhat removed from a c t u a l l i n g u i s t i c f a c t s ; however,
i t does n o t seem t h a t S a u s s u r e changed h i s views s u b s t a n t i a l l y where
t h e c o n t r a s t between t h e s y n c h r o n i c and d i a c h r o n i c aspect,s of language
12
i s concerned.
It i s t h e r e f o r e s a f e t o s a y t h a t t h e e s s e n t i a l i n g r e d i e n t s of Saus-
s u r e ' s c o n c e p t of ' s t a t i c ' l i n g u i s t i c s c a n b e found i n t h i s a r t i c l e of
1894. F i r s t l y , t h e r e i s (though s t i l l undefined) t h e concept of langue
which h e l i n k s w i t h t h e a n t i - h i s t o r i c a l view of language when h e a f f i r m s :
"il n'y a d e ' l a n g u e ' e t d e s c i e n c e de l a l a n g u e qu'a l a c o n d i t i o n
i n i t i a l e de f a i r e a b s t r a c t i o n d e c e q u i a p r 6 c s d e , de c e q u i r e l i e e n t r e
e l l e s l e s 6poques." (31a; s. SM, 4 6 ) . H i s affirmation therefore that
language i s n o t h i n g b u t "un cas p a r t i c u Z i e r d e l a ~ h g o r i ed e s Signes"
(38 = CLG(E), 169) a n t i c i p a t e s h i s l a t e r d e f i n i t i o n of language as a
system of s i g n s and a p a r t i c u l a r semiology. Secondly, t h e concept of
language s t a t e i s f o r t h e f i r s t t i m e p r e s e n t e d ( a s t h e u s e of 'gpoquel
i n t h e above q u o t a t i o n s u g g e s t s ) ; S a u s s u r e h o l d s t h a t a b s t r a c t i o n of
p r e c e d i n g e v e n t s i s t h e a b s o l u t e p r e r e q u i s i t e f o r e s t a b l i s h i n g "ce q u i
e s t dans un ; t a t " (31a). Thirdly, Saussure envisages t h e d i s t i n c t i o n
between h i s t o r i c a l and n o n - h i s t o r i c a l v i e w p o i n t s by s u g g e s t i n g t h e meta-
phor of v e r t i c a l and h o r i z o n t a l ' f a c t s of language (33) . Saussure believed
t h a t any g e n e r a l i z a t i o n a b o u t language i s i m p o s s i b l e u n l e s s a s p e c t s of
' s t a t e ' a r e c l e a r l y s e p a r a t e d from t h o s e belonging t o ' e v e n t s ' (cf.
SM, 46 and 180, n . 1 6 1 ) .
A d d i t i o n a l c l a r i f i c a t i o n s were made by Saussure i n n o t e s e n t i t l e d
11
s t a t u s e t motus" of a b o u t 1895 ( c f . SM, 37), where h e c r i t i c i z e s t h e
c o n f u s i o n of ';tat ' and '&&ement ' i n l i n g u i s t i c argument. He t h i n k s
t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between t h e s e two a s p e c t s t o b e "si c a p i t a l e qu'on p e u t
se demander s i e l l e n e n g c e s s i t e p a s deux s c i e n c e s . " (SM, 4 7 ) . An
i n t e r e s t i n g and momentous a s p e c t ( a p a r t from t h e new terminology) i s
t h u s added when S a u s s u r e a f f i r m s :

Tout f a i t s t a t i q u e e s t , p a r o p p o s i t i o n aux f a i t s diachroni,ques,

accompagne d e s i g n i f i c a t i o n ( e t p a r 12, d ' u n a u t r e c a r a c t e r e
fondamental). Tout c e q u i concourt a l a s i g n f i c a t i o n d ' u n e
manie're quelconque e s t s t a t i q u e , r&iproquement. (SM, 48) .
Godel (SM, 184) s u g g e s t s t h a t t h e term ' s t a t i q u e ' i s a n a t u r a l outcome
of S a u s s u r e ' s u s e of ' s t a t u s ' ; i t may w e l l have been t h e o t h e r way round,
s i n c e ' s t a t i c ' was a n e x p r e s s i o n c u r r e n t i n t h e s o c i a l s c i e n c e s d u r i n g
t h e 1880s a t t h e l a t e s t ( c f . 2.2.2.1). He c o r r e c t l y p o i n t s o u t t h a t
t h e n o t i o n of system i m p l i e s t h e s t a t i c viewpoint (SM, 1 8 3 ) ; i t should
b e added t h a t S a u s s u r e ' s i d e a s a b o u t semiology presuppose t h e same
p o i n t of view.
The remaining q u e s t i o n of t h i s c h a p t e r concerns t h e r e l a t i o n between
Zinguis t i q u e diachronique, c i n g r n t i q u e , 6vo Zutive, h i s t o r i q u e ( a l l of
which were employed by Saussure a s synonymous t e r m s ) , on t h e one hand,
and Z i n g u i s t i q u e a t a t i q u e , synchronique ( o r b e t t e r : i d i o s y n c h r o n i q u e )
or a n t i - h i s t o r i q u e , on t h e o t h e r . It a p p e a r s t h a t t h e a c c e p t e d view
i s t h a t S a u s s u r e regarded t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between synchrony and d i a -
chrony a s a n " o p p o s i t i o n r a d i c a l e " ( c f . SM, 1 8 4 ) , and t h i s view h a s been
c r i t i c i z e d by s c h o l a r s s i n c e t h e l a t e 1920s ( s . 2 . 2 . 2 . 3 ) . Recently
Engler (1967:126) saw r e a s o n t o b e l i e v e t h a t S a u s s u r e himself was n o t
as s u r e a b o u t t h i s d i s t i n c t i o n a s i t might have appeared t o t h e r e a d e r
of t h e Cours. Saussure had n o t e d , a f t e r having i n t r o d u c e d t h e n o t i o n
of t i m e a s t h e h i s t o r i c a l f a c t o r , t h a t one c o u l d h e s i t a t e a b o u t t h e e x a c t
moment when t h i s concept of timk should b e i n t r o d u c e d ( s . CLG(E) , l 7 4 f .) .
Indeed, we b e l i e v e t h a t S a u s s u r e had many d o u b t s about v a r i o u s a s p e c t s
of h i s t h e o r i e s a t v a r i o u s s t a g e s of h i s academic c a r e e r . Schuchardt
a p p e a r s t o have been t h e f i r s t t o s e n s e t h i s when h e w r o t e h i s r e v i e w
of t h e COWS. l3 S a u s s u r e r e c o g n i z e d t h e d i f f i c u l t i e s i n e s t a b l i s h i n g
a f i r m b a s i s f o r t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between Zangue and parole ( c f . 2 . 2 . 1 . 2 ) ,
s i g n i f i z and s i g n i f i a n t ( c f . 2.2.3.2), o r synchrony and d i a c h r o n y f o r
t h a t m a t t e r , b u t h e knew a t t h e same time t h a t t h e s e d i s t i n c t i o n s a r e
n e c e s s a r y f o r a g e n e r a l t h e o r y of language.
A t times i t a p p e a r s t h a t t h e e d i t o r s of t h e Corns h a v e b e e n t o
blame f o r some of t h e o v e r s t a t e m e n t s which a r e u s u a l l y a s c r i b e d t o
Saussure. Thus t h e a f f i r m a t i o n t h a t t h e " o p p o s i t i o n e n t r e l e d i a c h r o n i q u e
e t l e synchronique & l a t e s u r t o u s l e s p o i n t s " (CLG, 127) i s t h e e d i t o r s ' ,
as t h e c r i t i c a l e d i t i o n (CLG(E), 198) r e v e a l s . On a n o t h e r o c c a s i o n ,
t h e Cows s t a t e s t h a t t h e r e i s a n "antinomie r a d i c a l e e n t r e l e f a i t
6 v o l u t i f e t l e f a i t s t a t i q u e " (CLG, 129) where t h e s t u d e n t s ' n o t e s
s p e a k simply of a " d i f f 6 r e n c e f f (CLG(E) , 201). I n f a c t S a u s s u r e con-
c e i v e d of t h e p o s s i b i l i t y of s t u d y i n g language from a p a n c h r o n i c view-
p o i n t , a l t h o u g h h e thought t h a t i t a d m i t t e d g e n e r a l s t a t e m e n t s o n l y
and c o u l d n o t t r e a t t h e c o n c r e t e f a c t s of language (CLG, 1 3 4 f . ; CLG(E)y
212f .). I n t h e subsequent c h a p t e r S a u s s u r e r e f u t e s t h e i d e a t h a t t h e
It
v e r i t 6 synchronique" c o n s t i t u t e s t h e n e g a t i o n of t h e " v 6 r i t 6 d i a c h r o n i q u e "
)

and t h a t t h e s e two were m u t u a l l y e x c l u s i v e (CLG(E), 2 l 4 f .). He emphasizes

t h a t t h e s e two a s p e c t s complement each o t h e r ; i n f a c t , t h e y produce a t
t i m e s q u i t e s i m i l a r r e s u l t s t o t h e e x t e n t t h a t t h e y can e a s i l y b e con-
f u s e d (CLG(E), 216).
These o b s e r v a t i o n s d i d n o t p r e v e n t S a u s s u r e from s u g g e s t i n g on
s e v e r a l o c c a s i o n s t h a t t h e s e two a s p e c t s have t o b e c l e a r l y d i s t i n g u i s h e d :
1 ) ' s t a t i c ' o r 'synchronic' l i n g u i s t i c s d e a l s w i t h t h e l o g i c a l and psycho-
l o g i c a l r e l a t i o n s between c o e x i s t i n g terms which form a system, whereas
2) ' e v o l u t i v e ' o r 'diachronic' linguistics studies the relationships
of terms i n s u c c e s s i o n , terms which s u b s t i t u t e f o r each o t h e r and do
n o t form a system (CLG(E), 227). The concept of system i s t h e c r u c i a l
 p r e r e q u i s i t e of synchrony o r , t h e o t h e r way round, t h e system of l a n -
guage c a n o n l y b e r e v e a l e d through a s y n c h r o n i c approach t o language.
Synchronic l i n g u i s t i c s i s concerned w i t h t h e a n a l y s i s of a g i v e n l a n -
guage s t a t e , and draws i t s g e n e r a l i z a t i o n s from d a t a a s m a n i f e s t e d
i n Zangue and n o t parole. T h i s view was underscored by S a u s s u r e w i t h t h e
t h e h e l p of t h e f o l l o w i n g diagram which t h e e d i t o r s of t h e Cows d i s -
14
torted: Saussure suggested

Langue Paro Ze
-A
Langue Langue
s tatique &o Zutive
and n o t

( S y nchronie

Langage [ lnngue Diachronic

( parole (CLG, 139 ) .
S a u s s u r e conceded t h a t whatever i s d i a c h r o n i c i n language h a s i t s
o r i g i n i n parole (CLG(E), 223) b u t h e a f f i r m s t h a t h i s d i s t i n c t i o n con-
f i r m s t h a t t h e f a c t s of parole remain i n t h e i n d i v i d u a l (224). It
t h e r e f o r e a p p e a r s t h a t t h e r e a r e two c o n f l i c t i n g v i e w p o i n t s i n S a u s s u r e ' s
argument: on t h e one hand h e t a k e s t h e p o s i t i o n of t h e e m p i r i c i s t ac-
knowledging t h e f a c t t h a t l i n g u i s t i c e v o l u t i o n o r i g i n a t e s i n t h e s p e e c h
of t h e i n d i v i d u a l , and on t h e o t h e r h e proclaims i n t h e manner of a
r a t i o n a l i s t t h a t t h e form which l i n g u i s t i c s t a k e s , i s , from a t h e o r e -
t i c a l p o i n t of view, independent of t h e p r a c t i c e (CLG(E), 225). Both
s y n c h r o n i c and d i a c h r o n i c l i n g u i s t i c s a r e concerned w i t h t h e same o b j e c t ,
15
namely Zangus, o n l y t h e approach i s d i f f e r e n t .
A s S a u s s u r e ' s f r e q u e n t u s e of ' s t a t i c ' ( i n t h e s e n s e of ' s y n c h r o n i c ' )
i m p l i e s , s y n c h r o n i c l i n g u i s t i c s i s concerned w i t h language s t a t e s , ' G t a t s
de langue'. I n o r d e r t o d e s c r i b e such a s t a t e (and t h e system of language)
t h e t i m e f a c t o r must b e s e t a s i d e (CLG(E), 1 8 1 ) . S a u s s u r e admits t h a t
i t i s d i f f i c u l t t o d e f i n e p r e c i s e l y what ;tat means. F i r s t of a l l a
language s t a t e c o n s t i t u t e s "un e s p a c e de temps" and n o t a p o i n t of t i m e ,
The main p r e r e q u i s i t e i s t h a t t h e r e i s a s p a c e of t i m e d u r i n g which
I1
l a somme d e s m o d i f i c a t i o n s survenues e s t presque I!] n u l l e " (CLG(E),
229). This could mean a decade, f i f t y y e a r s o r even a l o n g e r p e r i o d
of t i m e ( c f . CLG, 1 4 2 ) ; a language s t a t e cannot b e d e f i n e d o t h e r t h a n
by absence of change (CLG(E) , 230). He s u g g e s t s t h e term epoch which
h e p r e f e r s t o p e r i o d t o i n d i c a t e what h e means; i n f a c t h e b e l i e v e s t h a t
p e r i o d s i g n i f i e s f o r t h e h i s t o r i a n a s p a c e of t i m e s u g g e s t i n g , however,
change a t t h e same time. I n t h e P o r t Royal Grammar, f o r i n s t a n c e , A r n a u l t
and L a n c e l o t i n t e n d e d t o d e s c r i b e t h e s t a t e of t h e French l a n g u a g e i n
t h e mid-17th c e n t u r y w i t h o u t mixing i t w i t h e a r l i e r s t a g e s (CLG(E), 1 8 3 ) .
S a u s s u r e p o i n t s t o t h e grammarians of e a r l i e r c e n t u r i e s (he s p e a k s of t h e
II
grammaire t r a d i t i o n n e l l e " ) which r e p r e s e n t "un p o i n t d e v u e i r r g p r o c h -
able" (ibid.) a s f a r a s 'synchronic' l i n g u i s t i c s i s concerned. He adds
t h a t t h i s t r a d i t i o n a l view needs n o t o n l y r e v i v a l b u t r e v i s i o n . In
t h i s r e s p e c t i t may b e u s e f u l t o know some h i s t o r i c a l l i n g u i s t i c s s i n c e
16
i t makes i t e a s i e r t o u n d e r s t a n d t h e n o t i o n of language s t a t e (p. 1 8 4 ) .
It must b e emphasized t h a t i n a d e q u a t e r e a d i n g of t h e Corns h a s l e d
many l i n g u i s t s t o b e l i e v e t h a t S a u s s u r e s t r e s s e d t h e v a l i d i t y and impor-
t a n c e of s y n c h r o n i c l i n g u i s t i c s o v e r and above t h e d i a c h r o n i c t r e a t m e n t
of language. Q u i t e t h e c o n t r a r y i s t r u e however. The e d i t o r s a r r a n g e d
t h e m a t e r i a l a t t h e i r d i s p o s a l q u i t e d i f f e r e n t l y from S a u s s u r e ' s approach
t o t h e t o p i c b e c a u s e they wished t o p u t emphasis on what t h e y r e g a r d e d
as p a r t i c u l a r l y n o v e l and i m p o r t a n t . I n h i s second c o u r s e , f o r i n s t a n c e ,
Saussure s t a t e d :

A p d s a v o i r b i e n Gtudi.6 c e q u i e s t h i s t o r i q u e , il f a u t o u b l i e r
l e p a s s 6 pour G t u d i e r l e synchronique. (CFS 15:66; o u r i t a l i c s ) .

Probably f o r p e d a g o g i c a l r e a s o n s - S a u s s u r e thought s y n c h r o n i c l i n g u i s t i c s
t o b e much more d i f f i c u l t t o d e a l w i t h t h a n d i a c h r o n i c l i n g u i s t i c s ( c f .
CLG, 141; SM, 88) - t h e h i s t o r i c a l t r e a t m e n t of language was regarded a s
f a c i l i t a t i n g t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n i n t o t h e s t a t i c a s p e c t of language s t u d y
( c f . SM, 35, 55, 77, 181, 1 8 6 ) . I n an i n t e r v i e w w i t h A. R i e d l i n g e r i n
January 1909, S a u s s u r e s t a t e d t h a t one must b e g i n w i t h d i a c h r o n i c
 29 4

l i n g u i s t i c s and t h a t synchrony s h o u l d b e d e a l t w i t h s e p a r a t e l y . However,

h e added, w i t h o u t continuous c o d t r a s t w i t h diachrony s y n c h r o n i c s t u d i e s
would l e a d t o nowhere ( s . SM, 2 9 ) . But i t a p p e a r s t h a t S a u s s u r e a l s o
thought a good knowledge of t h e Indo-European languages t o b e a n e c e s s a r y
p r e r e q u i s i t e f o r a c o u r s e d e a l i n g w i t h g e n e r a l q u e s t i o n s of language
( c f . SM, 35). This would e x p l a i n why t h e b u l k of h i s second c o u r s e
c o n s i t e d of a n "Apercu d e l a l i n g u i s t i q u e indo-europ6enne comme i n t r o -
d u c t i o n 2 l a l i n g u i s t i q u e g6n6rale1' ( i b i d . ) .
I n c o n c l u s i o n , i t can b e s a i d t h a t S a u s s u r e s t r e s s e d t h e importance
of d i s t i n g u i s h i n g between synchrony and diachrony i n l i n g u i s t i c s a s
imposed on u s by t h e n a t u r e of t h i n g s and a s t h e c o n d i c i o s i n e qua non
s o a s n o t t o i n t r o d u c e c o n f u s i o n i n t o t h e s t u d y of language (CLG(E),
179). However, h e d i d n o t s a c r i f i c e t h e h i s t o r i c a l approach i n f a v o u r
o f t h e n o n - h i s t o r i c a l one, a l t h o u g h h e l a i d t h e f o u n d a t i o n f o r such an
i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o r s h i f t of emphasis which h a s become one of t h e p o s t -
Saussurean developments of l i n g u i s t i c s . Many a s p e c t s of S a u s s u r e ' s
t h e o r y n o t o n l y presuppose t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between synchrony and d i a -
chrony b u t a r e i n t h e f i n a l a n a l y s i s a p p l i c a b l e o n l y t o t h e n o n - h i s t o r i c a l
t r e a t m e n t of l i n g u i s t i c phenomena, e.g. t h e a n a l y s i s of t h e system of
language, i t s s e m i o l o g i c a l n a t u r e , and t h e concept of t h e s i g n ( c f . 2 . 2 . 3 ) .
2.2.2.3 Post-Saussurean D i s c u s s i o n s o f t h e D i s t i n c t i o n between
Sync.hrony and ~ i a c h r o n ?i n L i n g u i s t i c s

Le problzme des reZations exactes entre

Ze diachronique e t l e synchronique sub-
s i s t e t o u t entier, personne n'en a en-
core domint3 tous Zes 6Zt3ments pour en
donner une solution intzgrale vraiment
s a t i s faisante.

A. Sechehaye i n 1939 (&Zanges Bully, 23)

!?he unity of l i n g u i s t i c s i s t o be found

i n the overcoming of the Saussurian an-
tinomy between diachrony and synchrony.
~ n d r 6M a r t i n e t i n 1954 (Word 10: 125)

Ever since Saussure, much has been made

of a dichototry t h a t i s sometimes regarded
as very s t e r n and s t r i c t between the tuo.
I t i s becoming increasingZy apparent
from d i f f e r e n t sources t h a t there i s
no clear-cut and well-defined dichotomy.
I n fact, it may not even be f r u i t f u l t o
think of it as a dichototry a t a l l . I t
is q u i t e clear t h a t we s t i l l need t o t a l k
about the history of things.
17
E r i c P. Hamp i n an i n t e r v i e w i n 19 70

These t h r e e q u o t a t i o n s from t h r e e s c h o l a r s b e l o n g i n g t o t h r e e
d i f f e r e n t g e n e r a t i o n s and t h r e e d i s t i n c t t h e o r e t i c a l p e r s u a s i o n s and
made a t i n t e r v a l s of roughly f i f t e e n y e a r s i l l u s t r a t e n i c e l y t h e ' s t a t e
of t h e a r t ' concerning t h e Saussurean d i s t i n c t i o n between synchrony
and diachrony. I n 1939, a g e n e r a t i o n a f t e r t h e p u b l i c a t i o n of t h e
Corns, one of i t s e d i t o r s complained t h a t t h e problem of t h e r e l a t i o n
between synchrony and diachrony had n o t y e t been s o l v e d a l t h o u g h s i n c e
t h e l a t e 1920s t h i s q u e s t i o n had been d i s c u s s e d . We may r e c a l l t h a t
i n 1928, a t t h e F i r s t I n t e r n a t i o n a l Congress o f L i n g u i s t s , R. Jakobson
9

(with t h e endorsement of Trubeckoj and K a r c e v s k i j ) proclaimed t h a t t h e

antinomy between s y c h r o n i c and d i a c h r o n i c a s p e c t s of p h o n o l o g i c a l i n v e s -
t i g a t i o n s h o u l d b e e l i m i n a t e d i n o r d e r t o r e c o g n i z e t h e s y s t e m a t i c and
f u n c t i o n a l n a t u r e of l i n g u i s t i c change ( s . SW I, 3 ) , 1 8 and a l s o t h a t
i n t h e s u b s e q u e n t y e a r Max K u t t n e r termed S a u s s u r e ' s concept of synchrony
a contradictio i n adiecto (ZFSL 53: 476).
The Prague s c h o o l which g e n e r a l l y a c c e p t e d (though n o t i n a l l i t s
consequences) t h e langue/paroZe d i s t i n c t i o n r e j e c t e d t h e synchrony/
diachrony dichotomy, and t h i s f o r two r e a s o n s . It was argued t h a t
p h o n o l o g i c a l change could n o t b e a d e q u a t e l y analyzed u n l e s s t h e phono-
l o g i c a l s y s t e m had been t a k e n i n t o a p p r o p r i a t e account; S a u s s u r e ' s t e n -
t a t i v e e q u a t i o n of s y n c h r o n i c : d i a c h r o n i c = s y s t e m a t i c : n o n - s y s t e m a t i c ,
t h e l i n g u i s t s f e l t , had t o b e opposed. M a r t i n e t , h i m s e l f a younger
member of t h e Prague movement, l a t e r c r i t i c i z e d Jakobson's endeavours
i n t h e f i e l d of d i a c h r o n i c phonology f o r l a c k of c l a r i t y and t h e t e l e -
o l o g i c a l b i a s u n d e r l y i n g t h e argument ( c f . M a r t i n e t , 1964:46). As early
as 1938, M a r t i n e t had d i s c u s s e d S a u s s u r e ' s dichotomy,19 and i n 1955 h e
p r e s e n t e d h i s Economie des changements phonztiques which i s now r e g a r d e d
a s a c l a s s i c example of how t h e n o t i o n of system i n language can b e
s u c c e s s f u l l y a p p l i e d t o d i a c h r o n i c a n a l y s i s and t h u s overcome t h e a p p a r e n t
d i s p a r i t y between t h e two a s p e c t s . 2 0 It must b e p o i n t e d o u t , however,
t h a t M a r t i n e t h a s n o t o f f e r e d a n y t h i n g which t o any n o t i c e a b l e d e g r e e ,
could r i g h t l y b e termed a t h e o r e t i c a l framework w i t h i n which t h e r e l a t i o n
between t h e two a s p e c t s p u t forward by S a u s s u r e could b e a p p r o p r i a t e l y
defined. M a r t i n e t ' s p h o n o l o g i c a l work h a s c e r t a i n l y been m e t h o d o l o g i c a l l y
sound and t h e p r i n c i p l e s h e followed i n h i s a n a l y s e s a r e w i t h o u t doubt
a c c e p t a b l e t o t h e p r a c t i t i o n e r b u t t h i s does n o t p e r m i t him t o e s c a p e
from t h e primacy of t h e o r y . Indeed M a r t i n e t ' s s u g g e s t i o n s immediately
f o l l o w i n g t h e above q u o t a t i o n of 1954 s u p p o r t our c l a i m t h a t h i s e m p i r i c a l
b i a s p r e c l u d e s a t h e o r y of languageY2' a c l a i m which we may i l l u s t r a t e
with t h e following statement:

I1 f a u t & p i k e r , une f o i s d e p l u s , que c e n ' e s t pas 3 l a l a n g u e

d e s e conformer aux 6 d i t s d e s l i n g u i s t e s , mais aux l i n g u i s t e s
 d ' a d a p t e r l e u r s mgthodes s i e l l e s n e r e n d e n t pas p l e i n e j u s t i c e
2 l a l a n g u e g t u d i g e . ( M a r t i n e t , 1964:125f.).
I n o t h e r words, t h e primacy of e m p i r i c a l i n v e s t i g a t i o n i s m a i n t a i n e d
t o t h e e x t e n t t h a t , i n t h e f i n a l a n a l y s i s , t h e l i n g u i s t becomes s u b j e c t e d
t o t h e overwhelming f a c t s of language. Nobody w i l l b e s u r p r i s e d t o
f i n d s o l i t t l e t h e o r y (though much t e r m i n o l o g i c a l e x p e r t i s e ) i n M a r t i n e t ' s
work, a n o b s e r v a t i o n which does n o t apply by any means e x c l u s i v e l y t o
t h i s s c h o l a r b u t t o a l l l i n g u i s t s of t h e Praguian mould, i n c l u d i n g R.
Jakobson, and J. Vachek who n e v e r tires of r e i t e r a t i n g h i s view t h a t
S a u s s u r e ' s a p p a r e n t i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of s y n c h r o n i c w i t h s t a t i c i s unaccep-
22
table.
Not many l i n g u i s t s f a m i l i a r w i t h t h e Cows adopted a s p r a g m a t i c
a p o s i t i o n r e g a r d i n g t h e synchronyldiachrony d i s t i n c t i o n a s d i d Bloom-
f i e l d who d i v i d e d h i s Language i n t o a d e s c r i p t i v e p a r t (Bloomfield,
1933:21-280) and a n h i s t o r i c a l one (1933:281-509). 23 It is t r u e , t h a t
a number of s c h o l a r s , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n C o n t i n e n t a l Europe, c o n t i n u e d
f a v o u r i n g t h e t r a d i t i o n a l approach t o l i n g u i s t i c problems and d i s r e g a r d e d
d e s c r i p t i v e s t u d i e s of language. On t h e o t h e r hand, American l i n g u i s t s
of t h e B l o o m f i e l d i a n mould e s p e c i a l l y and a l s o , u n t i l r e c e n t l y , t r a n s -
f o r m a t i o n a l i s t s c o n c e n t r a t e d t h e i r e f f o r t s e x c l u s i v e l y on d e s c r i p t i v e
matters. C h a r a c t e r i s t i c a l l y , t h e Saussurean dichotomy was l i t t l e d i s p u t e d
i n North America, though i t s h o u l d b e n o t e d t h a t C. F. Hockett e x p r e s s e d
h i m s e l f t o b e a g a i n s t t h e s t r i c t s e g r e g a t i o n of t h e two v i e w p o i n t s a r g u i n g
t h a t i t would b e a m i s t a k e t o t r e a t " d e s c r i p t i v e and h i s t o r i c a l l i n g u i s -
t i c s a s two s e p a r a t e compartments, each b i t of i n f o r m a t i o n b e l o n g i n g
24
e x c l u s i v e l y i n t h e one o r t h e o t h e r . " (Hockett, 19583303f.).
However, i n h i s f i e S t a t e of t h e A r t of 1968, Hockett a d m i t t e d
t h a t t h e problem of t h e r e l a t i o n between t h e way language works a t a
g i v e n t i m e and t h e way i t changes through t i m e "had been n o t s o much
s e t t l e d [ i n t h e 1 9 5 0 ~ 1a s swept under t h e rug." (Hockett, 1968:9).
T h i s c r i t i c i s m i n t h e f i r s t p l a c e seems t o apply t o t h e development of
l i n g u i s t i c s i n North America o n l y , s i n c e t h e b u l k of t h e numerous s t u d i e s
devoted t o t h e d i s c u s s i o n of t h e synchronyldiachrony d i s t i n c t i o n and i t s
 298

i m p l i c a t i o n s was p u b l i s h e d i n ~ u r o ~ and was t h e r e t h a t symposia

e , i~t ~
were h e l d on t h e problems connekted w i t h t h i s dichotomy. 26 A closer
a n a l y s i s of t h e w r i t i n g s on t h i s t o p i c which have appeared d u r i n g t h e
five-and-a-half decades f o l l o w i n g t h e p u b l i c a t i o n of t h e Corns i n 1916,
however, r e v e a l s t h a t H o c k e t t ' s c r i t i c i s m a p p l i e s t o European l i n g u i s t i c s
too. Indeed, t h e i m p r e s s i o n p r e v a i l s t h a t u n t i l r e c e n t l y no s e r i o u s
a t t e m p t had been made t o r e s o l v e t h e problem of t h e r e l a t i o n between
h i s t o r i c a l and d e s c r i p t i v e l i n g u i s t i c s . It i s t r u e , a s B. Malmberg
p o i n t e d o u t a t t h e Tenth I n t e r n a t i o n a l Congress of L i n g u i s t s , t h a t one ,I
l o o k s i n v a i n i n t h e C o w s f o r a n o u t l i n e of t h e t e c h n i q u e of s y n c h r o n i c
d e s c r i p t i o n , 2 7 b u t t h i s a p p l i e s t o d i a c h r o n i c s t u d y a s w e l l and one
s h o u l d n o t e x p e c t t o f i n d t h i s t y p e of c o d i f i c a t i o n i n a book by t h e
"homme d e s fondements" (E. Buyssens i n CFS 20:8; c f . Robins, 1 9 6 7 : 4 f . ) .
Malmberg's complaint s u g g e s t s a n a p p a r e n t l y w i d e l y s h a r e d view t h a t
S a u s s u r e ought t o b e c r i t i c i z e d f o r having l e f t p o s t e r i t y w i t h many
problems t o r e s o l v e and f o r h a v i n g f a i l e d t o o f f e r a complete t h e o r y
28
of how l i n g u i s t i c s s h o u l d d e a l w i t h i t s o b j e c t of i n v e s t i g a t i o n ;
b u t i n f a c t t h e y should b e t o l d t h a t t h e y missed t h e whole p o i n t and
f a i l e d t o c a r r y o u t t h e d u t y of t h e s c i e n t i s t who h a s been g i v e n a new
paradigm, namely t o engage i n what T. S . Kuhn termed "mopping-up1' opera-
tions. It i s c e r t a i n l y c o r r e c t t o a r g u e t h a t S a u s s u r e ' s d i s t i n c t i o n
provided t h e b a s i s f o r a n a l y s i s r a t h e r t h a n s y n t h e s i s and t h a t h i s s t a t e -
ments must b e understood a s a n a t t e m p t , " d i e ~ e i n i g u n g s p r c f u n gd e r
D e s c a r t e s s c h e n M e d i t a t i o n e n am Befunde d e r L i n g u i s t e n noch einmal vor-
zunehmen", a s K. ~ i i h l e rw i s e l y observed some t h i r t y - f i v e y e a r s ago ( s .
B c h l e r , 1965:6f.), i . e . t o make t h e l i n g u i s t aware of what h e i s doing.
It i s i n t h i s r e s p e c t t h a t G. ~ i h s i l zi s c o r r e c t i n s a y i n g t h a t t h e
i n i t i a l d i s s o c i a t i o n of t h e h i s t o r i c a l approach from t h e n o n - h i s t o r i c a l
was a b s o l u t e l y n e c e s s a r y f o r t h e c r e a t i o n of a new s y n t h e s i s , 2 9 b u t we
h a s t e n t o add t h a t no t h e o r i s t of language can b e completely s a t i s f i e d
w i t h t h e a t t i t u d e of t h o s e who, l i k e Hjelmslev and many of h i s f o l l o w e r s ,
have c o n t e n t e d themselves w i t h t r e a t i n g s y n c h r o n i c problems of language
a n a l y s i s almost e x c l u s i v e l y .30 T h i s i s t h e more s u r p r i s i n g s i n c e we
r e g a r d H j e l m s l e v a s one of t h e most prominent l i n g u i s t s t o have s t r i v e n
f o r a theory o f language.31 i n ' view of t h i s u n s a t i s f a c t o r y s t a t e of
a f f a i r s , namely t h a t u n t i l t h e l a t e 1960s no a d e q u a t e s o l u t i o n had b e e n
p r e s e n t e d , i t i s r e g r e t t a b l e t o n o t e t h a t a s r e c e n t l y a s i n 1968 l i n g u i s t s
could a f f i r m t h a t a " t o p i c such a s synchrony v s . diachrony seems h a r d l y
c a p a b l e o f l e a d i n g t o i m p o r t a n t new i n s i g h t s some f i f t y y e a r s a f t e r
De S a u s s u r e ' s f ours",^* b e c a u s e i t h e i g h t e n s our i m p r e s s i o n t h a t h a r d l y
any l i n g u i s t a p p e a r s t o have r e c o g n i z e d t h e f a c t t h a t t h e synchrony/
d i a c h r o n y d i s t i n c t i o n r e p r e s e n t s a problem of t h e o r e t i c a l importance
and n o t o n e of merely h e u r i s t i c and methodological v a l u e .
A s p o i n t e d o u t on e a r l i e r o c c a s i o n s , S a u s s u r e ' s i d e a s evolved con-
s i d e r a b l y on v a r i o u s p o i n t s and h e h i m s e l f never r e s o l v e d many d i f f i -
culties. A t t i m e s t h e y were compounded by t h e e d i t o r s . It i s c o r r e c t
t h a t S a u s s u r e equated d i a c h r o n i c w i t h non-grammatical and s y n c h r o n i c
w i t h grammatical (CLG(E), 321) and t h a t h e denied t h e s y s t e m a t i c charac-
ter of l i n g u i s t i c change (318) a t t r i b u t i n g t o them a n a c c i d e n t a l charac-
t e r (197). H e tended t o a t t r i b u t e t o diachrony t h e s t u d y of ( h i s t o r i c a l )
phonology a s t h e domaine par exceZZence and maintained t h a t t h e r e e x i s t s
no s y n c h r o n i c c o u n t e r - p a r t (CLG(E), 320). On t h e o t h e r hand, S a u s s u r e
made s t a t e m e n t s ( n o t i n c o r p o r a t e d i n t h e Cours) which seem t o p o i n t t o
a n o t h e r d i r e c t i o n , a l t h o u g h h e does n o t seem t o have drawn t h e c o n c l u s i o n
we would c o n s i d e r a p p r o p r i a t e today. I n order t o i l l u s t r a t e t h a t t h e
l i n g u i s t s h o u l d n o t c o n s i d e r one a s p e c t e x c l u s i v e l y , S a u s s u r e chose t h e
German forms Gast / G&te a n a l y z i n g them s u c c e s s i v e l y from a s y n c h r o n i c
and a d i a c h r o n i c p o i n t of view. The p u r e l y grammatical ( i . e . s y n c h r o n i c )
s t a t e m e n t would r e a d 'h changes t o 2 i n t h e p l u r a l " adding t h a t " p l u r a l "
p r e s e n t s t o t h e mind an i d e a of meaning. The a l t e r n a t i o n Gast / ~Zste,
S a u s s u r e h o l d s , i s "dans son p r i n c i p e fondamental" of t h e same n a t u r e a s
t h e a l t e r n a t i o n capio/percipio (CLG(E), 219). Although h e n o t e s t h a t
t h e a l t e r n a t i o n i s s i g n i f i c a n t i n t h e f i r s t example b u t n o t i n t h e second
h e i s s a t i s f i e d t h a t "un c e r t a i n h a s a r d " f a v o u r s o r may n o t f a v o u r such
meaningful o p p o s i t i o n of terms ( i b i d . ) . He obviously f a i l e d t o o b s e r v e
t h a t t h e o p p o s i t i o n Gaste/GZste d e r i v e s from t h e h i s t o r i c a l l y e a r l i e r
(meaningful) o p p o s i t i o n g a s t / g a s t i which i s s y s t e m a t i c and n o t merely
p h o n e t i c a s i n t h e c a s e of c a p i b / p e r c i p i o .
S a u s s u r e spoke on s e v e r a l o c c a s i o n s of dgplacement of one form by
a n o t h e r ( c f . CLG(E), 196, l97), b u t h e h e l d t h a t t h e d i s p l a c e m e n t of a
system " s e f a i t p a r l a s u c c e s s i o n d e f a i t s i s o l 6 s " (CLG(E), 212). It
cannot b e denied t h a t S a u s s u r e ' s views a r e r a t h e r ' a t o m i s t i c ' , despite
t h e f a c t t h a t "d6placement" evokes t h e n o t i o n of a s y s t e m a t i c k i n d of
change. It almost a p p e a r s t h a t S a u s s u r e was m i s l e d by h i s diagram of
t h e axe d e s simultan&t&s ( o r contemporan$it$s, a s S a u s s u r e s u g g e s t e d )
which a b s t r a c t s t h e t i m e f a c t o r (AB) and t h e a x e d e s s u c c e s s i v i t ~ s(CD):

(CLG, 115; CLG(E), 1 7 7 ) .

By r e p l a c i n g t h e two-dimensional diagram by a t h r e e - d i m e n s i o n a l one,

and t h e q u i t e m i s l e a d i n g c o - o r d i n a t e c r o s s by t h e image of a c y l i n d e r ,
t h e s y s t e m a t i c n a t u r e of l i n g u i s t i c changes i s underscored and t h e
e x p r e s s i o n of "displacement of a system" becomes meaningful:

Each s l i c e d e n o t e s what S a u s s u r e c a l l e d a " t r a n c h e h o r i z o n t a l e " t o which

h e a t t r i b u t e d t h e primacy o v e r t h e v e r t i c a l c u t , b e c a u s e t h e n a t i v e s p e a k e r
i s o n l y aware of t h e f i r s t whereas o n l y t h e l i n g u i s t r e c o g n i z e s t h e
e x i s t e n c e of t h e second (CLG(E) ; 1 9 8 ) . 33 S a u s s u r e h i m s e l f spoke a t times
of "dGplacement d'un systsme" (CLG, 134; CLG(E), 212) which, i n h i s view
however, i s caused by e v e n t s f o r e i g n t o i t and devoid of any s y s t e m a t i c
character. On t h e o t h e r hand, t h e a f f i r m a t i o n i n t h e s u b s e q u e n t para-
graph t h a t d i a c h r o n i c f a c t s imposed on t h e language a r e i n no way of a
g e n e r a l n a t u r e , h a s no convincing b a s i s i n t h e c r i t i c a l e d i t i o n of t h e
Cours; we b e l i e v e t h a t S a u s s u r e ' s f i n d i n g s i n h i s ~ 6 m o i r ewould h a v e
guarded him a g a i n s t such a n extreme s t a t e m e n t .
During t h e post-war p e r i o d E. C o s e r i u a t t e m p t e d a s o l u t i o n of what
S a u s s u r e r e g a r d e d a t t i m e s a s t h e "antinomie du d i a c h r o n i q u e e t du
synchronique" ( c f . CFS 1 5 :6 6 ) . I n h i s Sincronia, diacronia e h i s t o r i a
of 1958 C o s e r i u s u b j e c t e d t h e Saussurean dichotomy t o c l o s e a n a l y s i s i n
d i s c u s s i n g t h e v a r i o u s phenomena i n v o l v e d i n l i n g u i s t i c change. Coseriu
f e l t t h a t S a u s s u r e ' s concept of synchrony a s a s t a t i c e n t i t y r e p r e s e n t s
n o t h i n g b u t a t r a n s i t u s ab inteZZectu ad rem (1958:9), and a r g u e d t h a t
34
language i s , a s Humboldt had m a i n t a i n e d , an energeia and n o t a n ergon.
He a l s o r e j e c t e d t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of h i s t o r y w i t h d i a c h r o n y , s i n c e ,
i n t h e f i n a l a n a l y s i s , everything is h i s t o r y i n l a n g u a g e , ( c f . Coseriu,
1958:135ff.). L i n g u i s t i c change, C o s e r i u r e i t e r a t e d t e n y e a r s l a t e r ,
i s a m o d a l i t y of language f u n c t i o n i n g ; i n a c e r t a i n s e n s e , a l l changes
are i n t e r n a l ( c f . C o s e r i u , 1958:121f.), and what a p p e a r s t o b e a change
from t h e p o i n t of view of a s t r i c t l i n g u i s t i c norm r e p r e s e n t s n o t h i n g
b u t a n a p p l i c a t i o n of t h e u n d e r l y i n g system of language ( C o s e r i u , 1970:
.
84) 35 C o s e r i u ' s endeavours however do n o t seem t o have had any n o t i c e -
a b l e impact on subsequent d i s c u s s i o n s of t h i s dichotomy, probably be-
c a u s e h i s major work was w r i t t e n i n Spanish and h a s n o t y e t been t r a n s -
l a t e d i n t o any of t h e t h r e e major languages of Western s c h o l a r s h i p
(s. C o s e r i u , 1958).
Much more r e c e n t l y S a u s s u r e ' s i d e a s h a v e a t t r a c t e d t h e a t t e n t i o n
of t h e t r a n s f o r m a t i o n a l - g e n e r a t i v e l i n g u i s t s , and i t would a p p e a r t h a t
i t was M. H a l l e ' s paper of 1962 on t h e p l a c e of phonology i n g e n e r a t i v e
grammar t h a t r e v i v e d t h e d i s c u s s i o n of t h e v a l i d i t y of t h e d i s t i n c t i o n
between synchrony and d i a c h r o n y i n l i n g u i s t i c a n a l y s i s ; and i n subsequent
y e a r s t h e q u e s t i o n of whether ;he s y n c h r o n i c o r d e r of r u l e s (of "compe-
tence") r e f l e c t a r e l a t i v e chronology of t h e i r o c c u r r e n c e i n l a n g u a g e
o r n o t h a s become a h o t l y d e b a t e d i s s u e ( c f . Chomsky/Halle, 1 9 6 8 : 2 5 2 f f . ;
King, 1969). We have g i v e n a p r e s e n t a t i o n of t h i s d i s c u s s i o n e l s e w h e r e
(s. Koerner, 1971),36 which need n o t b e r e p e a t e d h e r e . Suffice it t o
n o t e t h a t t h e problem i n t r o d u c e d by S a u s s u r e i s n o t merely s o l v e d by
simply r e j e c t i n g t h e dichotomy of synchrony v e r s u s d i a c h r o n y and by a
r e d e f i n i t i o n of t h e i m p l i c a t i o n s of i t s two components a s C o s e r i u (1970:
87) a p p e a r s t o s u g g e s t b u t t h a t t h e g o a l of t h e a n a l y s i s s h o u l d b e
formulated more e x p l i c i t l y by t h e l i n g u i s t concerned.
I n g e n e r a l , a p a r t from r e c e n t developments i n F r a n c e r e g a r d i n g
s t r u c t u r a l i s m , t h e main c u r r e n t s of which however do n o t concern l i n -
g u i s t i c s p r o p e r , 37 i t can b e s a i d t h a t s t r u c t u r a l i s m i n i t s t r a d i t i o n a l l y
a c c e p t e d s e n s e of f a v o u r i n g an e x c l u s i v e l y s y n c h r o n i c t r e a t m e n t of l a n -
\r
guage, h a s been more and more opposed by a number of l i n g u i s t s ; t h i s
can b e a t t r i b u t e d a t l e a s t i n p a r t t o t h e i n c r e a s e d t h e o r y o r i e n t a t i o n
c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of t r a n s f o r m a t i o n a l grammar i n i t s second p h a s e f o l l o w i n g
Chomsky 's Aspects i n 1965. S a u s s u r e ' s dichotomy between a s t a t i c syn-
chrony and a dynamic d i a c h r o n y w i l l c e r t a i n l y remain on t h e agenda and
c o n t i n u e t o occupy t h e minds of language t h e o r e t i c i a n s . 38 Ungeheuer
(1969) a t t e m p t s t o c l a r i f y t h e r e l a t i o n between synchrony and d i a c h r o n y
w i t h i n t h e framework of S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r y of t h e a r b i t r a i r e , and Lieb
(1968, 1970) h a s gone a s t e p f u r t h e r by embedding t h e dichotomy w i t h i n
an o v e r a l l t h e o r y of language w i t h p a r t i c u l a r emphasis on t h e i r t e m p o r a l
( c f . CLG(E), 1 6 4 f . ) and s y s t e m a t i c a s p e c t s , s e t t i n g up a n a x i o m a t i c
t h e o r y which i s based on a t h e o r y of communication and, i n i t s f i n a l
a n a l y s i s , a comprehensive semiology. It i s t o b e r e g r e t t e d t h a t Saus-
s u r e ' s d i s t i n c t i o n between synchrony and diachrony w i l l probably c o n t i n u e
t o b e a c c e p t e d mainly f o r i t s h e u r i s t i c v a l u e and t h a t more t h e o r e t i c a l l y
\C

i n c l i n e d l i n g u i s t s w i l l merely contend t h a t S a u s s u r e ' s "antinomy" s h o u l d

/i
b e more r e l a x e d b u t r e q y r i n g an a d d i t i o n a l o r almost e x c l u s i v e dynamic
i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of synchrony (which members of t h e Prague s c h o o l had
a l r e a d y c a l l e d f o r i n t h e l a t e 1 9 2 0 s ) ~ ' and a s t r u c t u r a l o u t l o o k o f syn-
40
chrony i n c o n t r a s t t o a merely ' a t o m i s t i c ' one. I n view of t h i s
t r a d i t i o n a l u n d e r e s t i m a t i o n of t h e importance and p o t e n t i a l impact of
S a u s s u r e ' s s u g g e s t i o n s , i t i s t h e r e f o r e hoped t h a t L i e b ' s S p r a c h s t a d i m
und Sprachsystem of 19 70 (which h e modestly s u b t i t l e d "Umrisse e i n e r
S p r a c h t h e o r i e " ) w i l l b e one of many s t u d i e s which f u n c t i o n a s a c a t a l y s t
and encourage l i n g u i s t s t o draw f o r t h t h e problem which h a s b e e n 'swept
under t h e r u g ' ( a s Hockett r e c e n t l y n o t e d ) and p l a c e i t i n t h e c e n t r e of
a theory of language.
 FOOTNOTES - 2.2.2.2/2.2.2.3

I
Cf. FdS's own a c c o u n t , ed. by R. Godel under t h e t i t l e "Souvenirs
d e F. d e S a u s s u r e c o n c e r n a n t s a j e u n e s s e e t s e s e t u d e s " , CFS 17: 12
[15]-25 (1960).

See K. Biihler, 1965[1934] :8; n o t e t h a t ~ i i h l e rw r o t e t h i s a s a

r e s u l t of h i s v e r y a t t e n t i v e r e a d i n g s of t h e CLG i n 1934; FdS's s t a t e -
ment of 1894 was n o t p r i n t e d b e f o r e 1957 ( s . SM, 3 1 ) .

T h i s p a s s a g e h a s b e e n p r i n t e d i n s e v e r a l p l a c e s , f i r s t e i n 1957
(SM, 31) t h e n i n Engler, 1959 :1 1 9 f . ( i n p a r t s and w i t h a t a c i Q t e x t u a l
emendation), and f i n a l l y i n CFS 20:13, and 21:95 (1963 and 1964 r e s -
p e c t i v e l y ) , ed. by E. B e n v e n i s t e . Cf. De Mauro, 1969:120f.; SW I , 744.

S. CFS 12:59 (1954); c f . SM, 31, n. 28, and p . 37 f o r i d e n t i -

fication.

Cf. t h e two r e l e v a n t p a s s a g e s of FdS (both of which were w r i t t e n

i n 1894): "Sans c e s s e l ' i n e p t i e a b s o l u e d e l a t e r m i n o l o g i e c o u r a n t e ,
l a n 6 c e s s i t g d e l a rgforme, e t d e montrer pour c e l a q u e l l e e s p s c e d '
o b j e t e s t l a l a n g u e en g & & a l , v i e n t g g t e r mon p l a i s i r h i s t o r i q u e ,
... " (CFS 21:95 [ 1 9 6 4 ] ) , and: "Ce s e r a un s u j e t d e & f l e x i o n p h i l o -
sophique pour t o u s l e s temps, que pendant une p g r i o d e d e c i n q u a n t e a n s ,
la science linguistique, ... , n ' a i t jamais eu mGme l a v e l l g i t g d e
s ' g l e v e r 2 c e degrg d ' a b s t r a c t i o n q u i e s t n g c e s s a i r e pour dominer d ' u n e
p a r t ce qu'on f a i t , d ' a u t r e p a r t en q u o i c e qu'on f a i t a une 1 6 g i t i m i t 6
e t une r a i s o n d ' z t r e dans l ' e n s e m b l e d e s s c i e n c e s . " (CFS 12:59 [ 1 9 5 4 ] ) .
6
Cf. SM, 36-7 f o r t h e r e l a t i v e chronology of t h e m a n u s c r i p t s Nos.
1-10; Notes personneZZes 1 5 and 16 of about 1897 a r e of m a r g i n a l impor-
t a n c e w i t h t h e r e s u l t t h a t FdS's s i l e n c e on m a t t e r s r e l a t e d t o g e n e r a l
l i n g u i s t i c s extended from 1895 t o 1907. Cf. however SW I , 743-50.
7
11
E. g.,
11
Langue et p a r o l e " (SM, 142-59), "Le phonsme" (159-68) ,
La p h r a s e e t l e syntagrne" (168-79), e t c .
8
It i s i n t h i s r e s p e c t t h a t FdS's s t a t e m e n t a t t h e o u t s e t of h i s
Mgmoire m e r i t s q u o t a t i o n : " E t u d i e r l e s f ormes m u l t i p l e s s o u s l e s q u e l l e s
s e m a i n f e s t e c e qu'on a p p e l l e l ' a indo-europgen, t e l e s t l ' o b j e t imm&
d i a t d e c e t opuscule: l e r e s t e d e s v o y e l l e s n e s e r a p r i s en c o n s i d g r a -
t i o n q u ' a u t a n t que l e s ph&-mmbes r e l a t i f s 2 l ' a en f o u r n i r o n t l ' o c c a -
s i o n . Mais s i , a r r i v g s a u b o u t du champ a i n s i c i r c o n s c r i t , l e t a b l e a u
du vocalisme indo-europ6en s ' e s t modifi; peu 2 peu sous nos y e w e t
que nous l e voyons s e grouper t o u t e n t i e r a u t o u r d e l ' a , p r e n d r e v i s -
& v i s d e l u i . une a t t i t u d e n o u v e l l e , il e s t c l a i r qu'en f a i t c ' e s t l e
s y s t s m e d e s v o y e l l e s dans son ensemble q u i s e r a e n t r g dans l e rayon d e
n o t r e o b s e r v a t i o n e t d o n t l e nom d o i t Gtre i n s c r i t 2 l a ~rernisrepage.
(Recuei 2 , 3) .
Lieb (1967:25) m a i n t a i n s t h a t t h e e s s e n t i a l l y new f a c t o r i n t r o -
duced by FdS i n t o t h e d i s c u s s i o n of v a l i d i t y of d e s c r i p t i v e l i n g u i s t i c s
was t h e " s y s t e m a t i c c o n c e p t i o n of t h e language s t a g e " (our i t a l i c s ) ,
a n i d e a which would p u t doubt on t h e e a r l y development of FdS's con-
c e p t of synchrony.

loWe a r e s u r p r i s e d t o r e a d i n B a r t i n a Harrnina Wind's a r t i c l e ,

'1
I n t r o d u c t i o n a un c o u r s d e l i n g u i s t i q u e g&&ale", Nph 27:21-30 (1942),
which makes e x p l i c i t r e f e r e n c e t o FdS and t h e CLG (pp. 2 3 f . ) : "Jesper-
s e n , l e l i n g u i s t e d a n o i s renommg, a compar; l ' e n s e m b l e d e s proc6des
.
l i n g u i s t i q u e s 2 un j e u d ' i k h e c s " (24) . Wind r e f e r s t o J e s p e r s e n ' s
Mankind, flation, a n d I n d i v i d u a l from a L i n g u i s t i c P o i n t of View which
f i r s t appeared i n 1925.

l1 We q u o t e , a s we d i d e a r l i e r i n t h i s s t u d y ( c f . 3 . ) , from a
copy of t h e p r o o f s which D r . R. Engler k i n d l y f u r n i s h e d u s w i t h , t h e
f i n a l t e x t of which i s t o a p p e a r i n Notes p e r s o n n e l l e s i n z d i t e s de FdS
(Wiesbaden: 0 . H a r r a s s o w i t z ) . Cf. a l s o t h e e x t r a c t s p u b l i s h e d i n CFS
12:59-65 (1954), and t h e a n a l y s i s of some passages i n SM, 43-6.

l2 The e d i t o r s of t h e CLG c o u l d t h e r e f o r e make f r e q u e n t u s e of

FdS's 1894 paper on s e v e r a l o c c a s i o n s , i n p a r t i c u l a r CLG(E), 155, 1 6 2 ,
l 6 8 f . , 197, 266, 5 0 5 f f . , and e l s e w h e r e .

l3 The r e l e v a n t p a s s a g e from S c h u c h a r d t ' s review ( n o t r e p r i n t e d

i n Hugo S c h u c h a r d t - B r e v i e r ) r u n s : " D a m d i e Form d e r D a r s t e l l u n g : d e r
e i n d r i n g l i c h e , g e b i e t e r i s c h e V o r t r a g d e s L e h r e r s , d e r j e d e n Wider-
spruch Gbert6nen w i l l , auch den e i g n e n . Die iibergrosse S i c h e r h e i t
d e s Ausdrucks v e r r z t e i n e halbbewuBte U n s i c h e r h e i t i n d e r Sache.
S a u s s u r e A b e r s i e h t n i c h t s , was man einwenden k c n n t e ; e r h e b t d a s Schwie-
-rige, A u f f ~ l l i g e ,Paradoxe h e r v o r ; s c h i e b t a b e r dann m i t e i n e r s t a r -
ken Handbewegung d i e Hemmnisse b e i s e i t e . D i e i n z a h l r e i c h e n V a r i a n t e n
a u f t r e t e n d e Grundformel l a u t e t : d i e b e i d e n Dinge s i n d schwer voneinander
zu t r e n n e n , a b e r e s i s t unmEglich s i e n i c h t voneinander zu t r e n n e n . "
(LGRP 38, c o l l . 7 [1917]).

l4 Lieb (1968:22-3) concluded t h i s from t h e CLG (without h a v i n g

s e e n t h e CLG(E)) b u t perhaps under t h e i n f l u e n c e of C o s e r i u (1958:27)
who d i s t i n g u i s h e d between "lengua s i n c r 6 n i c a M and "lengua d i a c r 6 n i c a U .

.
l 5Schuchardt (LGRP 38, c o l l 6) made t h e f o l l o w i n g i n t e r e s t i n g
o b s e r v a t i o n s concerning t h e r e l a t i o n between synchrony and diachrony.
on t h e one hand, and Zangue and p a r o l e on t h e o t h e r : " ...
da i i b e r a l l
b e i S a u s s u r e synchronic und langue e i n e r ~ e i t s ~ d i a c h r o n iund
e parole
 a n d e r s e i t s i n i n n i g s t e m Zusammenhang e r s c h e i n e n , s o f r a g e i c h w e i t e r
ob n i c h t etwa d i e s y n c h r o n i s c h e Sprachwissenschaft m i t d e r von d e r
hngue und di.e d i a c h r o n i s c h e m i k d e r von d e r p a r o l e ganz zusammenfallen
und w i r s t a t t zweier Hauptgabelungen, .. . , nur c i n e e i n z i g e . " We
t e n d t o b e l i e v e t h a t t h i s s u g g e s t i o n a p p e a r s t o a p p l y t o t h e f i r s t equa-
t i o n , provided langue i s d e f i n e d a s a system of i n t e r d e p e n d e n t s i g n s
( c f . CLG, 33, 106, 182, e t c . ) .

l6 I t a p p e a r s t h a t FdS d i s t i n g u i s h e d a t one t i m e between I t a t

h i s t o r i q u e and &bat s t a t i q u e ; i n a d d i t i o n h e employed I t a t t o g e t h e r
w i t h a number of o t h e r m o d i f i e r s ( c f . LTS, 2 2 ) .

l7Cf. LSA, B u l l e t i n No. 18 (Febr. 1971), p. 36.

l8 I n 1929, Jakobson, Trubeckoj , and K a r c e v s k i j f o r m u l a t e d t h e

p r i n c i p a l g o a l s of t h e C i r c l e , one of t h e f i r s t of t h e i r well-known
11
~ h & e s " b e i n g t h e i r p a r t i c u l a r view on t h i s dichotomy: I ' ... la
c o n c e p t i o n d e l a langue c o m e s y s t s m e f o n c t i o n n e l e s t envisager
C
egalement dans l ' g t u d e d e s ; t a t s d e l a n g u e pass$e, q u ' i l s ' a g i s s e d e l e s
r e c o n s t r u i r e ou d ' e n c o n s t a t e r l l & o l u t i o n . On n e s a u r a i t p o s e r d e
b a r r i & e s i n f r a n c h i s s a b l e s e n t r e l e s mgthodes synchronique e t d i a c h r o n i q u e
comme l e f a i t l l & o l e d e ~ e n & e . " (TCLP 1:7-8). I n t h e same y e a r Jakob-
son p r e s e n t e d h i s Remarques sur Z '&oZution phonologique du r u s s e ( =
TCLP 2 ) ; r e p r . i n SW I, 7-116 i n which h e t r i e d t o exemplify h i s i d e a s
of how t h i s "antinomy" should b e b r i d g e d , a s t u d y which was followed by
a more g e n e r a l s t a t e m e n t on t h e m a t t e r , " P r i n z i p i e n d e r h i s t o r i s c h e n
Phonologie", TCLP 4:247-67 (1931); F. t r a n s l . i n Trubeckoj, 1949:315-36,
and SW 1,202-20. The main s o u r c e of Jakobson's i n s p i r a t i o n a p p e a r s t o
have b e e n BdC who added, i n 1899, t o h i s e a r l i e r d i s t i n c t i o n between
s t a t i c and dynamic phonology, t h e f u r t h e r d i s c r i m i n a t i o n between dynamic
.
and h i s t o r i c a l (cf Hgusler, 1968: 6 3 ) .

.
l9 Cf "La phonologie synchronique e t diachronique", CILUP 6: 41-58;
r e p r . i n M a r t i n e t , 1968: 44-59 (under t h e t i t l e " C l a s s i f i c a t i o n e t h i e r -
a r c h i s a t i o n d e s f a i t s phoniques"). For M a r t i n e t ' s l a t e s t o p i n i o n s on
t h i s t o p i c , s. h i s p a p e r , "La phonologie synchronique e t diachronique",
PhonoZogie d e r Gegenwart, 64-74 (1967); d i s c u s s i o n , pp. 74-8.
20
S i m i l a r a t t e m p t s , n o t o n l y i n h i s t o r i c a l phonology, t o overcome
t h e S a u s s u r e a n dichotomy were made p a r t i c u l a r l y b y W. von Wartburg;
c f . h i s a r t i c l e s , "Das I n e i n a n d e r g r e i f e n von d e s k r i p t i v e r und h i s t o r i s c h e r
S p r a c h w i s s e n s c h a f t " , BVSAW 83:3-23 (1931), and "Betrachtungen Gber d a s
V e r h i l t n i s von h i s t o r i s c h e r und d e s k r i p t i v e r Sprachwissenschaft", ~ Z Z a n ~ e s
BaZZy, 3-18 L939). He does n o t seem t o have changed h i s views s i n c e
( c f . Wartburg, 1970: l 3 7 f f .) . Cf. a l s o E. Lerch, "Die neue Sprachwissen-
s c h a f t : S p r a c h g e s c h i c h t e und ~ a t i o n e n k u n d e " , NSpr 42:375-83 (1934), f o r
a n e a r l y s t a t e m e n t on t h i s i s s u e .
21
C f . M a r t i n e t ' s proposals:
"The u n i t y of l i n g u i s t i c s i s t o b e
found i n t h e overcoming of t h e S a u s s u r i a n antinomy [ ! I between d i a c h r o n y
and synchrony. I n s i m p l e r and more s p e c i f i c [ ? I terms, i t w i l l r e s u l t
from t h e r e c o g n i t i o n t h a t a r e a l u n d e r s t a n d i n g of what a language i s
a t a c e r t a i n p e r i o d , of how and why i t changes from one a g e t o a n o t h e r ,
can o n l y b e g a i n e d through a c a r e f u l o b s e r v a t i o n of how i t s e r v e s t h e
needs of a l l t h e s e c t i o n s of t h e community ... ", e t c . (Word 10:125
[I9541 ; o u r i t a l i c s ) .
22
S. h i s paper, "The Non-Static Aspect of t h e S y n c h r o n i c a l l y
S t u d i e d P h o n o l o g i c a l System", Phonologie d e r Gegenuart, 79-85 (1967);
.
d i s c u s s i o n , pp 85-7.

23 A s a r e s u l t i t was p o s s i b l e t o p u b l i s h t h e second p a r t s e p a r a t e l y
under t h e t i t l e Language H i s t o r y , ed. by Harry H o i j e r (New York: H o l t ,
R i n e h a r t & Winston, 1965) w i t h o u t t e x t u a l changes e x c e p t f o r a m p l i f i e d
n o t e s and an updated b i b l i o g r a p h y .

24 For a n overview of t h e d i s c u s s i o n of t h e Saussurean dichotomy

i n North America d u r i n g t h e p e r i o d of 1924-1965, s . H o c k e t t , 1968:lO-18.
It i s c u r i o u s t o n o t e t h a t a s l a t e as 1954 F r i t j o f A. Raven s p e c u l a t e s
a b o u t t h e o r i g i n of t h e term ' d i a c h r o n ( i s t ) i c ' and wonders whether
I o r d a n I O r r , 1937:283ff. were t h e f i r s t t o u s e i t o r n o t and c o n t i n u e s
II
It would a p p e a r t o b e a n a n a l o g i c a l f o r m a t i o n on t h e b a s i s of a n a c h r o n i s -
tic. P r o f e s s o r R.-M. S. H e f f n e r , ... , suggests diachronic a s a b e t t e r
word [ t h a n d i a c h r o n i s t i c ] . " Cf. h i s a r t i c l e (which i n c i d e n t a l l y mentions
FdS), though only f o r h i s work i n h i s t o r i c a l l i n g u i s t i c s , pp. 96, 9 9 ) ,
"An E v a l u a t i o n of t h e P o s i t i o n of t h e Neo-Grammarians", Monatshefte
46:95-101 (1954), a t p. 98, n. 16.

25 More t h a n 50% of a t o t a l of c l o s e t o 150 i t e m s d e a l i n g w i t h

t h i s dichotomy were p u b l i s h e d between 1965-70, and o n l y h a l f a dozen
w r i t t e n by American s c h o l a r s ; c f . E. F. K. Koerner, B i b l i o g r a p h i a Saus-
sureana, 1870-1970, P a r t I, S e c t i o n 4. ( a ) .
Y

26 Cf. M. M. Guxman, and E._A. Bokarev ( e d s .) , 0 s o o t n o s e n i i s i m o n -

nogo a n a l i z a i i s t o r i ~ e s k o g oi z u c e n ija j a z y kov (Moscow: I z d . Akad Nauk .
SSR, 1960). [The c o n f e r e n c e a p p e a r s t o have t a k e n p l a c e i n 1957 however;
c f . SW I , 5321. S. a l s o S p r a c h e - Gegenwart und Geschichte: Probteme
der S y n c h r o n i e und Diachronic ed. by Hugo Moser, e t a l . (Diisseldorf:
Schwann, 1969), i n p a r t i c u l a r t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n s by K. ~ a u m g g r t n e r(pp.
52-64), Bruno C o l b e r t (238-45), G. Cordes (207-19), H. G l i n z (78-91),
E. E. M c l l e r (129-46), G. Ungeheuer (65-77), and E. Zwirner (30-51).

27 Cf. Malmberg, "Synchronie e t diachronic", A[lO]CIL I , 13-25

(1969), a t p. 13; c f . a l s o t h e d i s c u s s i o n f o l l o w i n g t h e p r e s e n t a t i o n ,
op. c i t . , 25-36. Malmberg's p r e s e n t a t i o n and p a r t i c u l a r l y t h e v a r i o u s
i n t e r v e n t i o n s made by a number of s c h o l a r s of d i f f e r e n t p e r s u a s i o n s seem
q u i t e i n s t r u c t i v e and indeed i n d i c a t i v e of t h e g e n e r a l l y u n s o p h i s t i c a t e d
a t t i t u d e of l i n g u i s t s towards t h e synchronyldiachrony d i s t i n c t i o n .
Malmberg d i d n o t add f u r t h e r a s p e c t s t o t h e d i s t i n c t i o n b u t r a t h e r ex-
p r e s s e d what appear t o b e g e n e r a l l y a c c e p t e d views. He emphasized t h e
s y n c h r o n i c a s p e c t over and above t h e d i a c h r o n i c one, p o i n t e d o u t t h a t
t h e d e l i n e a t i o n of a language s t a t e i s a r b i t r a r i l y decided upon by t h e
a n a l y s t , and c i t e d C. ~ & i - ~ t r a u s as s an example of t h o s e s c h o l a r s who
 o b j e c t t o t h e Saussurean d i v i s i o n . Only Malmberg's a f f i r m a t i o n t h a t
t h e f a c t o r of time i s e x t r a - l i n g u i s t i c (A[IO]CIL I, 1 7 , and 23, where
h e a l s o contends t h e same f o r t h e s o c i a l f a c t o r ) was c r i t i c i z e d by s e v e r a l
p a r t i c i p a n t s i n t h d~i s c u s s i o n ( c f . V. I. Georgiev [ 2 6 ] , T. Slama-Cazacu
[ 2 7 ] , A. S. Mel'nicuk [ 3 0 ] , H. B . ~ o s g n[ 3 3 ] ) . W. P. Lehmann (29) p o i n t e d
t o t h e s u p e r f i c i a l s i m i l a r i t y between t h e r u l e s t r a d i t i o n a l l y s e t up by
t h e language h i s t o r i a n and t h o s e f o r m u l a t e d by t h e t r a n s f o r m a t i o n a l i s t
warning a ~ i n s t h e danger of n o t c l e a r l y d i s t i n g u i s h i n g t h e s e s u b s t a n -
t i a l l y d i f f e r e n t o p e r a t i o n s , i n p a r t i c u l a r s i n c e t h e g e n e r a t i v e grammarian
does n o t g i v e any c o n s i d e r a t i o n t o time. Georgiev (26) n o t e d t h a t many
s y n c h r o n i c s t u d i e s i g n o r e t h e h i s t o r i c a l a s p e c t a l t o g e t h e r and t e n d
t o c o n f i n e t h e i r s t u d i e s t o an i n v e n t o r y of l i n g u i s t i c f a c t s , and t h e r e
was almost unanimous consent among t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s t h a t t h e antinomy
ought t o b e overcome ( c f . V. G. Admoni [ 2 8 ] , J. Vachek [ 3 0 ] , I. B.
Xlebnikova [ 3 1 ] ) . H. Krenn ( 3 4 f . ) q u e s t i o n e d t h e t h e o r e t i c a l s t a t u s
of synchrony, w h i l e B. ~ a v r z n e kemphasized i t s dynamic a s p e c t ( 3 4 ) .
0. S. Axmanova (33) argued t h a t o n t o l o g i c a l and h e u r i s t i c a s p e c t s s h o u l d
b e k e p t s e p a r a t e when d e a l i n g w i t h t h e d i s t i n c t i o n , and H. G l i n z (32)
made a similar o b s e r v a t i o n when h e maintained t h a t diachrony p r e c e d e s
symhrony from a f a c t u a l p o i n t of view, whereas t h e m e t h o d o l o g i c a l view-
p o i n t r e q u i r e s a r e v e r s a l of t h i s o r d e r .
28
W e r e s o r t t o t h i s c i r c u m l o c u t i o n because we a r e n o t as s u r e a s
Lieb (1970:22) a p p e a r s t o b e , namely t h a t t h e q u e s t i o n of how d i a c h r o n y
and synchrony r e l a t e t o each o t h e r b e l o n g s t o t h e t h e o r y of l i n g u i s t i c s
and n o t t o t h e t h e o r y of language a s w e l l .

29 Cf. "Cu p r i v i r e l a e v o l u f i a c o n c e p t u l u i s a u s s u r i a n d e ' s i n c r o n i e '

~i ' d i a c r o n i e ' i n l i n g v i s t i c z " , PLG 5: 49-68 ( l 9 6 7 ) , a t p. 68.
30
It a p p e a r s i n t h i s r e s p e c t t h a t a passage i n t h e Coms contends:
I'
C ' e s t 2 l a s y n c h r o n i e q u ' a p p a r t i e n t t o u t c e qu'on a p p e l l e l a 'grammaire
.
g6n&ale1" (CLG, 141; b u t cf CLG(E) , 228), a s H j e l m s l e v ' s q u o t a t i o n of
t h i s p a s s a g e i n h i s P r i n c i p e s de grammaire g6n6raZe (Copenhagen: A. I?.
H d s t & Sdn, 1928; r e p r . 1969), p. 102 s u g g e s t s .

31 It is t h e r e f o r e r e v e a l i n g t o n o t e t h a t H j e l m s l e v ' s Sproget, which

appeared i n 1963 and which i s almost e x c l u s i v e l y concerned w i t h d i a c h r o n i c
l i n g u i s t i c s ( s . Hjelmslev, l97O), d a t e s back t o r a d i o t a l k s h e l d i n 1943,
t h e same y e a r t h a t h i s Prolegomena ( s . OSG) appeared, i n which t h i s dicho-
tomy i s p a s s e d o v e r i n s i l e n c e . E a r l i e r , on 1936, Hjelmslev had main-
tained: "Les g t u d e s synchroniques n e c o n s t i t u e n t pas un domaine 2 p a r t
et q u i peut stre n g g l i g 6 p a r l a t h g o r i e 6 v o l u t i v e , comme on l ' a c r u quel-
q u e f o i s . A e $ t e d e l ' i n t g r g t t h g o r i q u e e t i n t r i n s G q u e q u ' e l l e s pr6sen-
t e n t pour l a s t r u c t u r e g 6 n g r a l e du l a n g a g e l e s 6 t u d e s synchroniques pr6-
s e n t e n t un i n t 6 r g t gminemment p r a t i q u e : e l l e s j e t t e n t l e s b a s e s i n d i s -
p e n s a b l e s 2 t o u t hypoth$se g v o l u t i v e . " ( S t u d i i B a l t i c i 6: 41) .
3 2 ~ f .S. C. Dik, J . G. Kooij , and E. M. Uhlenbeck, "Some Impressions
of t h e Tenth I n t e r n a t i o n a l c o n g r e s s of L i n g u i s t s " , Lingua 19:225-32
( l 9 6 8 ) , a t p. 227. It a p p e a r s t h a t they mainly r e f e r t o Malmberg's
q u i t e u n i n s p i r i n g l e c t u r e ( s . f n . 27) which h a r d l y c o n t a i n e d a n y t h i n g
which t h e a u t h o r had n o t s a i d a l r e a d y i n h i s s t u d y of 1945, Syst2me e t
mzthode (Lund: L. W. K. G l e e r u p ) , 22-32.
 309

33 The diagram was n o t FdS's own c r e a t i o n b u t was, i n i t s e s s e n c e ,

s u g g e s t e d t o me by my f r i e n d Maitsuji Tajima some y e a r s ago; h e t h e n t o l d
me t h a t h e had l e a r n e d i t d u r i n g h i s s t u d i e s a t Kyushu U n i v e r s i t y i n
t h e e a r l y 1960s b u t could n o t r e c a l l i t s e x a c t s o u r c e .

.
34 Cf C o s e r i u ' s e a r l i e r s t a t e m e n t on t h i s m a t t e r , " ~ e t e r m i n a c i 6 n
y entorno: Dos problemas du una l i n g & t i c a d e l h a b l a r " , RJb 7: 29-54
( l 9 5 5 / 5 6 ) , i n wich h e a f f inned t h a t language e x i s t s i n speech o n l y .
Cf. a l s o t h e c r i t i q u e of C o s e r i u , 1958 by M. Sandmann i n ZRPh 76: 136-41
(1960), e s p . pp. 1 3 8 f f . Cf. a l s o K. Togeby i n RPh 14:159-62.

35 Other l i n g u i s t s who h a v e a s s o c i a t e d themselves w i t h Humboldtian

, i d e a s have r e j e c t e d t h e synchrony/diachrony d i s t i n c t i o n a s a n antinomy,
a d m i t t i n g i t s h e u r i s t i c v a l u e o n l y . Cf., a s a n example of t h e more
' t r a d i t i o n a l ' s c h o l a r s , W. von Wartburg's c o n v i c t i o n t h a t t h e dichotomy
i s more c o n c e a l i n g t h e f a c t s of language t h a n r e v e a l i n g them ( c f . Wart-
b u r g , 1970:10ff., 1 8 1 f f . ) , and, among t h e more 'modern' l i n g u i s t s ,
H. G l i n z who r e c e n t l y s t a t e d ( t h u s approaching a viewpoint s t r i k i n g l y
r e m i n i s c e n t of H. P a u l ) : "Synchronie i s t ... keineswegs e i n Gegensatz
zu 'Geschichte"; j e d e r Sprachzustand e n t h z l t e i n S t k k Entwicklung, e i n
Stcck Geschichte ... . Dabei kann es s e i n , d a s s d i e e i n e n Sprach-
t e i l h a b e r s p r a c h l i c h e E i n h e i t e n und S t r u k t u r e n b e n u t z e n , d i e h i s t o r i s c h
gesehen ' S l t e r ' s i n d , a n d e r e s o l c h e , d i e ' n e u e r ' s i n d ; e s kann auch i n
d e r Sprache e i n und d e s s e l b e n S p r a c h t e i l h a b e r s ' B l t e r e s ' und 'Neueres '
nebeneinander l i e g e n und nebeneinander b e n u t z t werden; ... (Glinz,
1970:17).) T h i s would mean t h a t i t i s p r a c t i c a l l y i m p o s s i b l e t o d e t e c t a n
&bat de Zangue i n which language e x h i b i t s a more o r l e s s r i g o r o u s 'systsme
o?i t o u t s e t i e n t ' , a s M e i l l e t termed i t . A p o s i t i o n of t h i s k i n d n o t
only n e g a t e s t h e v a l i d i t y of t h e o r y b u t a l s o r e d u c e s m e t h o d o l o g i c a l p r i n -
c i p l e s t o q u e s t i o n a b l e v a l u e , an o b s e r v a t i o n which i n s p i r e d G l i n z ' s
Linguistische Grundbegriffe ( s . G l i n z , 1970) and which makes t h i s ill-
conceived book a reductio ad absurdurri of l i n g u i s t i c s c i e n c e .

36 An i m p o r t a n t p a p e r which we overlooked a t t h a t time, Hans Isen-

b e r g ' s "Diachronische Syntax und d i e logische Struktur e i n e r Theorie des
Sprachwandels", Stud. G r m t i c a 5: 133-68 ( l 9 6 5 ) , h a s now been a n a l y z e d
by H e n r i Wittmann i n Linguistics 65:90-101 (1971).

37 Cf . G. Schiwy (comp. ) , Der franz8sische Strukturalisrnus: Mode -

Methode - IdeoZogie (Reinbeck n . Hamburg: Rowohlt, 1969) ; idem, "Zur
deutschen Rezeption d e s f r a n z k i s c h e n S t r u k t u r a l i s m u s " , Stinnen der
Zeit 95: 406-21 (l97O), P. Aubenque, "Sprache, St r u k t u r e n , G e s e l l s c h a f t:
K r i t i s c h e Bemerkungen zum f r a n z i j s i s c h e n S t r u k t u r a l i s m u s " , Philosophische
Perspektiven: Ein Jahrbuch 11, 9-25 (FrankfurtIM.: V. Klostermann, 1 9 7 0 ) ,
and J . R e i t e r , " S t r u k t u r und Geschichte: Der z w e i d e u t i g e Versuch e i n e r
E n t i d e o l o g i s i e r u n g d e s Geschichtsdenkens durch den S t r u k t u r a l i s m u s " ,
ZPhiZosF 24:159-82 (1970). Cf. a l s o P i a g e t , 1968, and ~ a r n G c z i ,1970.

38 We h a v e i n mind p a r t i c u l a r l y s c h o l a r s such a s 6 . Ungeheuer,

K. Heger, H.-H. Lieb, and a l s o H . S c h n e l l e , a l t h o u g h we have t o n o t e
w i t h r e g r e t t h a t h i s H d i l i t a t i o n s s c h r i f t of 1960, Prolegomena zw
F o r m a l i s i e r u n g i n d e r S p r a c h w i s ~ e n s c h a f t , i s s t i l l unpublished.

39 Cf. B. Trnka, "M;thode d e comparaison a n a l y t i q u e e t grammaire

.
compar6e h i s t o r i q u e " , TCLP 1:33-8 (19 29) ; r e p r i n Prague S c h o o l Reader,
68-80 (19 64) .
40 Thus I,. Heilrnann a f f i n n s t h a t " l e s t r u c t u r a l i s m e d i a c h r o n i q u e
[ s i c ] , p a r sa mgthode i n t g g r a l e , d g p a s s e l ' a n t i n o m i e e n t r e s y n c h r o n i e
e t diachronie". S. h i s p a p e r , " S t r u c t u r a l i s m e e t h i s t o i r e dans l e
domaine l i n g u i s t i q u e i t a l i e n " , A[IO]CILPR 11, 1091-1102 (1965) .
See a l s o V a l e r i a Guf u-Romalo, "Diachronie e t synchronie", A [IOICIL I ,
483-8 (1969), i n p a r t i c u l a r pp. 4 8 5 f f .
2.2.3 The Concept of t h e Langu?ge Sign and R e l a t e d Notions

The Saussurean concept of the l i n g u i s t i c .

sign i s stiZZ a very useful one, but it
needs some clarification, because several
of i t s possible interpretations lead t o
contradictions.
J.W.F. Mulder i n 1971 ( ~ i n g u i s t i q u e7:93)

A r e c e n t a t t e m p t a t a n e x h a u s t i v e b i b l i o g r a p h y of w r i t i n g s devoted
t o t h e d i s c u s s i o n of t h e l i n g u i s t i c s i g n and n o t i o n s connected w i t h t h i s
concept h a s brought t o l i g h t a t l e a s t t h r e e major i n s i g h t s p e r t a i n i n g
t o t h e language s i g n , a l l of which r e q u i r e e x t e n s i v e t r e a t m e n t i n a
s e p a r a t e chapter: 1 ) The n a i v e i d e a t h a t S a u s s u r e s t o o d a t t h e begin-
n i n g of a c o n c e p t i o n of language a s a system of s i g n s h a s t o b e aban-
doned; on t h e o t h e r hand, r e c e n t c l a i m s t h a t a l l i n d i v i d u a l i n g r e d i e n t s
'of S a u s s u r e ' s concept of t h e language s i g n were a n t i c i p a t e d i n p h i l o -
s o p h i c a l and l i n g u i s t i c work from a n t i q u i t y t o t h e l a t e 1 9 t h c e n t u r y
(cf . Ortigues, 1962: 56-8; Coseriu, l967a: 112; L u t h e r , 1970: 1 5 ) cannot
b e completely substantiated.~,~aussure'sconcept of t h e language s i g n
and p a r t i c u l a r l y h i s a f f i r m a t i o n s a b o u t t h e a r b i t r a r i n e s s of t h e s i g n
and t h e q u e s t i o n of r e l a t i v e m o t i v a t i o n have f r e q u e n t l y been m i s i n t e r -
p r e t e d ; t h i s i s p a r t l y due t o t h e f a c t t h a t t h e Cours was compiled w i t h
t h e h e l p of s o u r c e s of d i v e r g e n t o r i g i n b u t probably a l s o b e c a u s e of
e i t h e r a s u p e r f i c i a l f a m i l i a r i t y on t h e p a r t of t h e r e a d e r w i t h t h e
t e x t o r p e r s o n a l p r e c o n c e p t i o n s of t h e i d e a , o r b o t h ; a r e - i n t e r p r e t a t i o n
of S a u s s u r e ' s views i s t h e r e f o r e i n d i s p e n s a b l e i n o r d e r t o e v a l u a t e t h e
v a r i o u s post-Saussurean developments concerning t h e l i n g u i s t i c s i g n .
3) The abundance of p u b l i c a t i o n s d u r i n g t h e p a s t two decades devoted
t o t h e language s i g n and r e l a t e d n o t i o n s makes i t i m p o s s i b l e t o d i s c u s s
a l l a s p e c t s of t h i s concept w i t h i n t h e framework of t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y ;
however, t h e f a c t t h a t none of S a u s s u r e ' s i d e a s h a s r e c e i v e d s o much
a t t e n t i o n , c r i t i c i s m and re-appraisal.,
s u g g e s t s t h e f r u i t f u l n e s s of h i s
1
d o c t r i n e and i t s continuous impact on contemporary l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y .
2.2.3.1 The Q u e s t i o n o f t h e Sources o f S a u s s u r e ' s S e m i o l o g i c a l
Theory ,

In der Geschichte der Sprachwissenschaft

v e r h z l t es sich, wie m i r scheint, i n noch
hijherem Masse ebenso [as i n l i t e r a r y h i s -
tory ], da hier d i e Neuorientierungen o f t
d a m fiihren, dass das schon einmal Entdeckte
oder gute Ideen und Formulierungen einfach
aufgegeben und vergessen werden. So z.B.
entspricht d i e Saussuresche Theorie des
Zeichens m i t ihrer Unterscheidung zwischcn
s i g n i f i a n t , s i g n i f i ; und chose fast gemu
der der Stoiker, die auch xwischen onpaTvov
anus ~ v S ~ ~ v(oder o v ~ E K T O V ) und ~ p z y p a(oder
T U ~ K ~ V O Vunterschieden, und derjenigen
von Augustinus, d i e den genannten stoischen
Begriffen verbum, d i c i b i l e und r e s entsprechen
Ziess .
Eugenio Coseriu i n 1967 ( s . Coseriu, 1970:153)

f i e S i g n i f i e r and the Signified of the Stoics

are called "strikingZy reminiscent of de
Saussure's s i g n i f i a n t and s i g n i f i & " [ i n
Robins, 1 9 6 7 ] ( 1 6 ) ; but i s t h i s r e a l l y fair
t o de Saussure who no doubt simply meant t o
quote and who, a f t e r aZZ, has more profound
concepts t o h i s c r e d i t ?
Henry M . Hoenigswald i n 1971 (JHBS 7:207)

I n a r e c e n t a r t i c l e devoted t o t h e o r i g i n and development of t h e

concept of t h e " a r b i t r a i r e du signe", E. Coseriu concluded, a f t e r h a v i n g
t r a c e d s i m i l a r s t a t e m e n t s i n l i n g u i s t i c and p h i l o s o p h i c a l l i t e r a t u r e
from t h e Greeks t o t h e l a t e n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y :

I n d e r T a t e r s c h e i n e n aZZe Elemente s e i n e r [ i . e . FdS's]

T h e o r i e d e s a r b i t r a i r e schon i n d e r v o r s a u s s u r e s c h e n Sprach-
b e t r a c h t u n g . S a u s s u r e h a t k e i n e i n z i g e s Element zu d i e s e r
T h e o r i e hinzugefiigt. (Coseri-u, l967a: 1 1 2 ) .
This a f f i r m a t i o n , p a r t i c u l a r l y when t a k e n o u t of c o n t e s t , must a p p e a r
a v e r y b o l d s t a t e m e n t i n d e e d , arid t h e r e a d e r might wonder whether Saus-
s u r e was e v e r a s i n v e n t i v e and o r i g i n a l as many modern l i n g u i s t s h a v e
t a k e n him t o be. C o s e r i u ' s s u g g e s t i o n s , however, a r e n o t an i s o l a t e d
c o n t e n t i o n among s c h o l a r s who h a v e devoted much a t t e n t i o n t o t h e h i s t o r y
of l i n g u i s t i c thought. Thus L. Kukenheim (1966:13) n o t e d t h a t t h e word,
as d e f i n e d by A r i s t o t l e (De I n t e r p r e t a t i o n e 16a 1 9 ) a s 4wvfi U ~ ~ ~ V T I K ? ~

11vox s i g n i f i c a t i v a " , "annonce trzs l o i n d e ' s i g n e l i n g u i s t i q u e ' d e

Saussure." Kukenheim, who d e a l s w i t h t h e s p e c u l a t i o n s of t h e S t o i c s
a b o u t t h e n a t u r e of language i n t h e subsequent p a r a g r a p h s , does n o t
draw any p a r a l l e l s between t h e i r i d e a s and t h o s e p u t forward by S a u s s u r e .
T h i s h a s b e e n done b y H. R . Robins who h o l d s t h a t t h e S t o i c s "formalized
t h e dichotomy between form and meaning, d i s t i n g u i s h i n g i n l a n g u a g e
' t h e s i g n i f i e r ' and ' t h e s i g n i f i e d ' , i n terms s t r i k i n g l y r e m i n i s c e n t of
d e S a u s s u r e ' s s i g n i f i a n t and s i g n i f i g . I' (Robins, 1967: 1 6 ) . Some twenty
y e a r s ago Robins (1951:26, n . 2 ) drew a t t e n t i o n t o t h e s i m i l a r i t y between
' t h e d i s t i n c t i o n made by S a u s s u r e and t h a t made by t h e S t o i c s between
TO o ~ ~ c i ~ . v o p ~(v" o
s ivg n i f i g " ) and TO aqpaTvov ( " s i g n i f i a n t " ) and h a s
r e p e a t e d t h i s i d e a on a number of o c c a s i o n s ( c f . Robins, 1970:139),
b u t t h e r e a d e r ought t o h a v e b e e n warned by Robins' (1967: 1 6 ) c o n c e s s i o n
t h a t t h e r e l e v a n t t e x t s of t h e S t o i c s " a r e h a r d t o i n t e r p r e t " , w i t h t h e
r e s u l t t h a t one might s u s p e c t a m i s l e a d i n g i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of S t o i c con-
Z
c e p t s i n t h e l i g h t of our p r e s e n t body of knowledge.
B e a r i n g t h i s danger i n mind, i t would b e of h i s t o r i c a l i n t e r e s t
a t l e a s t t o c o n s i d e r t h e t r a d i t i o n a l d i s c u s s i o n of t h e word i n Western
philosophy of language from a n t i q u i t y t o t h e t i m e when S a u s s u r e f o r m u l a t e d
h i s i d e a s a b o u t t h e language s i g n . There i s f i r s t of a l l t h e a s p e c t of
t h e b i l a t e r a l n a t u r e of t h e s i g n which c a n b e t r a c e d back t o Greek p h i l o -
sophy of language. I n h i s Handbuch d e r SemasioZogie of 1951 ( a book
i g n o r e d by C o s e r i u t o g e t h e r w i t h t h o s e of R o b i n s ' ) , H. Kronasser p o i n t e d
t o Apollonius Dyscolus ( c . 200 A.D.) who argued t h a t t h e word ought
t o b e a s s e s s e d from t h e two d i s t i n c t v i e w p o i n t s of i t s c o n t e n t and i t s
3
sound s t r u c t u r e . This c o n c e p t i o n , however, c a n a t l e a s t b e t r a c e d
 314

b a c k t o Dionysius Thrax (c. 150 B.C.), as might b e i n f e r r e d from Robins

(1967:36; 1970:139), and probabiy t o A r i s t o t l e and t h e S t o i c s ( c f .
C o s e r i u , l967a: 88, and 1970: 1 5 3 ) . Arens (1969: l 7 f .) and Jacob (1969: 26)
q u o t e b r i e f p a s s a g e s from Sextus Empiricus' t r e a t i s e Adversus mathematicos
( w r i t t e n about 240 A.D.) and Arens e x p r e s s e s h i s a s t o n i s h m e n t a t t h e
t e r m i n o l o g i c a l agreement between t h e u s e of t h e two components of t h e
language s i g n ( " t h e s i g n i f i e d " and " t h e s i g n i f i e r " ) i n a d d i t i o n t o t h e
, o b j e c t d e s i g n a t e d by t h e s i g n , and S a u s s u r e ' s concept of t h e l a n g u a g e
sign. Arens could h a v e g a t h e r e d from Robins ( s . above) t h a t t h e Greek
S k e p t i c p h i l o s o p h e r followed d i r e c t l y , and w i t h o u t any s i g n i f i c a n t modi-
f i c a t i o n , t h e i d e a s p u t forward by t h e S t o i c s ( c f . K r i s t e v a , 1969:65) -
i d e a s which have r e c e n t l y b e e n a n a l y z e d i n d e t a i l by C o s e r i u ( 1 9 6 9 : l O l f f . ) -
and which u l t i m a t e l y l e a d back t o P l a t o n ' s CratyZus ( c f . C o s e r i u , 1969:
4
40).
, One c o u l d imagine t h a t S a u s s u r e , whose a t times r a t h e r r a t i o n a l i s t
approach t o language h a s been p o i n t e d o u t on o c c a s i o n ( c f . 2.2.1.2),
was w e l l aware of t h e t r a d i t i o n a l twofold d i v i s i o n of t h e s i g n . By t h e
same token, t h e r e a p p e a r s t o b e some j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r t h e c l a i m t h a t
S a u s s u r e , who, a s may b e r e c a l l e d , w r o t e h i s d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n on
t h e g e n i t i v e a b s o l u t e i n S a n s k r i t , was a l s o a c q u a i n t e d w i t h t h e t h e o r i e s
5
of t h e I n d i a n grammarians, i n c l u d i n g P Z p i n i ' s n o t i o n of t h e sphota,
and a l s o h i s concept of varl;zasjZdars'ana&Zopab , an "imperceptib i l i t y
of sound", o r Zopa " l o s s " t o u t court ( c f . Meier, 1961: 143; C o l l i n d e r ,
6
1962: 1 5 ) .
S i m i l a r l y , i t h a s b e e n p o i n t e d o u t by a number of s c h o l a r s , most
r e c e n t l y by W. L u t h e r (1970:15), t h a t t h e characterization (not t o say
d e f i n i t i o n ) of language a s a system of s i g n s h a s a v e r y long t r a d i t i o n
l e a d i n g from t h e Greek p h i l o s o p h e r Parmenides ( c . 600 B.c.) through
A r i s t o t l e , S t . Augustine, F r a n c i s Bacon, Locke, L e i b n i z , and Kant t o
*.
Hegel and a number of 1 9 t h - c e n t u r y p h i l o s o p h e r s of language.
I n 1.967 C o s e r i u p o i n t e d i n p a r t i c u l a r t o S t . Augustine (354-430)
who i n h i s e a r l y work De Dialectics ( c f . C o s e r i u , 1969:105-7) coined
t h e terms d i c t i o , d i c i b i t e , and res t o conform w i t h t h e S t o i c t r i p a r t i t i o n
of S i g n i f i e r , S i g n i f i e d , and Thing ( s . ZFSL 77:30). I n university lectures
h e l d d u r i n g t h e subsequent year;, Coseriu s u b s t a n t i a t e s h i s e a r l i e r claim-
c o n c e r n i n g t h e importance of S t . Augustine a s a p h i l o s o p h e r of language
c a l l i n g h i s De Magistro (389) t h e g r e a t e s t s e m i o t i c s of a n t i q u i t y (1969:
108). C o s e r i u (1969:105-23) t r e a t s S t . Augustine's i d e a s i n d e t a i l b u t ,
a l t h o u g h h i s concern i s t o show t h a t t h e r e i s a c o n t i n u i t y from a n t i q u e
philosophy t o modern l i n g u i s t i c t h o u g h t s 7 h e f a i l s t o t r a c e t h e s e i d e a s
w i t h i n medieval philosophy and t h e o l o g y i n t h e c h a p t e r s devoted t o t h e
m i d d l e a g e s (1969 :124-9, 130-36). C o s e r i u ' s t r e a t m e n t of t h e Modistae
i n p a r t i c u l a r , a s a l r e a d y e v i d e n t i n h i s e a r l i e r account ( c f . C o s e r i u ,
1967a), i s s i n g u l a r l y i n a d e q u a t e , and though w e cannot a t t e m p t a n o u t l i n e
of t h e i r t h e o r i e s of t h e s i g n we wish t o p o i n t o u t t h e d e s i r a b i l i t y of
8
s u c h r e s e a r c h b e i n g undertaken.
W i l l i a m James' a f f i r m a t i o n of 1890 t h a t language i s U a system of
signs, d i f f e r e n t from t h e t h i n g s s i g n i f i e d , b u t a b l e t o s u g g e s t them"
a p p e a r s t h e r e f o r e n o t t o r e p r e s e n t an i n g e n i o u s o b s e r v a t i o n by a n i n d i v i -
9
d u a l b u t t h e q u i n t e s s e n c e of a t r a d i t i o n a l c o n c e p t i o n .
Moreover, S a u s s u r e h i m s e l f d i d n o t c l a i m h i s i n s i s t e n c e on t h e
a r b i t r a r i n e s s of language a s h i s own o r i g i n a l i d e a ( c f . CLG, 100; CLG(E),
153). T h i s a p p a r e n t c o n c e s s i o n of t h e Geneva m a s t e r , however, does n o t
p r e c l u d e d i f f e r e n t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s of t r a d i t i o n a l concepts and, u l t i m a t e l y
a r a t h e r r a d i c a l s h i f t from a n almost a c c i d e n t a l n o t i o n t o a n axiom of
a n o v e r a l l theory ( c f . 2.2.3.2). It is q u i t e misleading t o argue, a s
w a s f i r s t s u g g e s t e d by Robins (1951: 10, n. 2), t h e n by ~ o n a ~ ~ and
, "
most r e c e n t l y by C o s e r i u (1969:64) and Luther (1970: l 6 ) , t h a t S a u s s u r e ' s
concept of t h e arbitraire h a s i t s o r i g i n a l s o u r c e i n t h e famous phgsei
o r n6mos v e r s u s t h z s e i d e b a t e of a n t i q u i t y , and t h a t h e merely took t h e
S t o i c viewpoint and t h a t of t h e i r f o l l o w e r s when h e a f f i r m e d t h e conven-
11
t i o n a l n a t u r e of t h e language s i g n .
C o s e r i u (1967a) h a s demonstrated t h a t t h e r e have been many s c h o l a r s
i n t h e 1 7 t h , 1 8 t h , and 1 9 t h c e n t u r i e s who n o t e d t h e a r b i t r a r y o r conven-
t i o n a l c h a r a c t e r of t h e words w i t h i n t h e language. Thus L e i b n i z , i n h i s
Nouveaux essais sur Z'entendement h m a i n of 1703, wrote:
 Je s a y qu'on a coustume d e d i r e dans l e s 6 c o l e s e t p a r t o u t
a i l l e u r s que l e s s i g n i f i c a t i i o n s des mots s o n t a r b i t r a i r e ( e x
i n s t i t u t o ) e t il est v r a y q u ' e l l e s n e s o n t p o i n t determinges '

p a r une n g c e s s i t g n a t u r e l l e . (Quoted from C o s e r i u , l967a: 8 6 ) .

L e i n b i z ' s s t a t e m e n t a t t e s t s t h a t t h e a r b i t r a r i n e s s of l e x i c a l meanings
was o p i n i o c o m u n i s i n h i s time, and h i s a d d i t i o n of t h e L a t i n t e r m
11
e x i n s t i t u t o " c a n b e t a k e n a s a n i n d i c a t i o n of t h e awareness of a l o n g
t r a d i t i o n which, a s C o s e r i u (1967a:87ff.) shows, n o t o n l y d a t e s back
t o t h e s c h o l a s t i c s b u t e v e n t u a l l y t o ~ r i s t o t l e l2
. Coseriu (l967a: 94f f ) .
a l s o i l l u s t r a t e s t h e t r a d i t i o n of t h e a r b i t r a r y and c o n v e n t i o n a l c h a r a c t e r
of t h e language s i g n i n French l i n g u i s t i c t h o u g h t , i n p a r t i c u l a r t h e
works of t h e M a s t e r s of Port-Royal, Antoine Arnauld (1612-94), Claude
L a n c e l o t (1615-95), and P i e r r e N i c o l e (1625-95), t h e i r Grammaire g & z i k a ~ e
(1660) and b g i q u e (1662), l3 E t i e n n e Bonnot d e ~ o n d i l l a c ' s (1715-80)
E s s a i of 1746, and o t h e r s . S u f f i c e i t t o q u o t e two i n t e r e s t i n g p a s s a g e s
from a n uncompleted and i n 1842 posthumously p u b l i s h e d e s s a y " F a i t s e t
,pensges s u r l e s s i g n e s " by Thgodore J o u f f r o y (1796-1842) t o suggest an
a f f i n i t y between Saussurean i d e a s and t h o s e of t h e A r i s t o t e l i a n t r a d i t i o n
i n t h e philosophy of language which could h a r d l y b e c l o s e r . After dis-
t i n g u i s h i n g ( i n agreement w i t h t h e t r a d i t i o n a l d i v i s i o n ) between n a t u r a l
s i g n s ( e . g . c r i e s ) and a r t i f i c i a l s i g n s ( i . e . those p e r t a i n i n g t o language),
Jouffroy s t a t e s :

Le r a p p o r t q u i a s s o c i e l e s uns [ i . e . t h e a r t i f i c i a l s i g n s ] 2 l a
c h o s e s i g n i f i 6 e e s t a r b i t r a i r e e t d e p u r e convention ...
. De
p l u s , c e t t e a s s o c i a t i o n d e s s i g n e s 2 l a chose s i g n i f i g e e t a n t
a r b i t r a i r e , e l l e n ' a r i e n d ' u n i v e r s e l . 14

It should b e added t h a t J o u f f r o y s p e a k s e x p l i c i t l y of "tous c e s systzmes

d e s i g n e s q u i composent l e s langages" and "ces systsmes d e s i g n e s qu'on
appe1l.e l e s langues" and t h a t h e t a k e s j u s t t h i s s y s t e m a t i c n a t u r e of
language a s a proof of i t s a r b i t r a r y c h a r a c t e r . l5 Furthermore, Jouf f r o y
a r g u e s t h a t even t h e ' n a t u r a l ' a s s o c i a t i o n of t h e s i g n i f i e r and t h e t h i n g
s i g n i f i e d i s , i n i t s f i n a l a n a l y s i s , c o n v e n t i o n a l and " e n t i s r e m e n t a r b i -
t r a i r e " . l6 For i n s t a n c e , t h e r e i s no s i m i l a r i t y between t h e c r y and t h e
p a i n ( t h e c r y i s s i g n a l l i n g ) , and J o u f f r o y concludes t h a t t h e a r b i t r a r y
n a t u r e of t h e r e l a t i o n between t h e s i g n and t h e o b j e c t s i g n i f i e d i s
t h e b a s i c p r i n c i p l e of any s i g n theory:

.d " e.x.p rlees sriaopnpeosr tt undu rsai gp np eo r t sa p &chose s i g n i f i E e ou l e r a p p o r t

ial, s u i generis, q u i n e peut
se ramener ?aucun
i a u t r e . 17

C o s e r i u (1967a:97) concludes from J o u f f r o y ' s a f f i r m a t i o n s a b o u t t h e

a r b i t r a r y n a t u r e of t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between t h e s i g n and t h e t h i n g
d e s i g n a t e d by i t t h a t t h e y c o n s t i t u t e a t u r n i n g p o i n t i n t h e t h e o r y
of s i g n s which had i t s i n f l u e n c e on S a u s s u r e ' s i d e a s on t h i s m a t t e r .
S t r a n g e l y enough, i t would seem, S a u s s u r e makes no mention of e i t h e r
J o u f f r o y o r any of h i s p r e d e c e s s o r s i n t h e philosophy of language, b u t
r e f e r s e x p l i c i t l y t o t h e l i n g u i s t Whitney (who, f o r h i s p a r t , a p p e a r s
t o f o l l o w t h e t r a d i t i o n of t h e E n g l i s h e m p i r i c i s t t h i n k e r s ) . l8 I n h i s
two p r i n c i p a l books devoted t o g e n e r a l problems of l i n g u i s t i c s of 1867
and 1875, Whitney p o i n t e d o u t r e p e a t e d l y t h a t words a r e a r b i t r a r y o r
.
c o n v e n t i o n a l s i g n s ( f o r t h o u g h t ) l9 But i t was a l s o h e who b r o u g h t up
once a g a i n t h e c l a s s i c o p p o s i t i o n between phijsei and t h G s e i i n h i s
'argument f o r t h e a r b i t r a r y n a t u r e of l i n g u i s t i c s i g n s , t h u s d i v e r t i n g
20
a t t e n t i o n from t h e v e r y l i n g u i s t i c i m p l i c a t i o n s of t h e d i t r a i r e .
Whitney a t t a c k s t h e view of "many of t h o s e who r e a s o n and w r i t e a b o u t
language" and who cannot r i d themselves of t h e o p i n i o n " t h a t t h e r e i s
somehow a r e a l i n t e r n a l c o n n e c t i o n between a t l e a s t p a r t of o u r words
and t h e i d e a s which t h e y r e p r e s e n t " . (LGL, 283). For him ( a s f o r Herder
and o t h e r s ) t h e o r i g i n of t h e spoken language i s t o b e found i n c r i e s
which h a v e e v e n t u a l l y been adopted and modified ( t o a l l o w d i s t i n c t i o n s
of e x p r e s s i o n ) by a g i v e n community, and Whitney a f f i r m s :

There i s no p l a u s i b i l i t y i n t h e s u g g e s t i o n t h a t h e [ i . e . man]
s h o u l d h a v e begun s o c i a l l i f e w i t h a n a t u r a l l y implanted
c a p i t a l of t h e means of s o c i a l communication - and any more
i n t h e form of words. (LGL, 289) .
S a u s s u r e s t r o n g l y opposes ( c f . CLG, 26; CLG(E), 331LL Whitney's argument
t h a t i t i s "a b l u n d e r of o u r educated h a b i t t o r e g a r d t h e v o i c e a s t h e
s p e c i f i c i n s t r u m e n t of e x p r e s s i o n " and t h a t v o i c e "is only one of s e v e r a l
instruments". Whitney's subsequent s t a t e m e n t s on t h e s u b j e c t do n o t f u l l y
j u s t i f y S a u s s u r e ' s c r i t i c i s m ( c f . n o t e 21); Whitney's claim, on t h e o t h e r
hand, t h a t language i s a s o c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n was extended by S a u s s u r e
t o "une i n s t i t u t i o n pure" and i n f a c t an i n s t i t u t i o n "sans anaZogue"
(FdS, 1894: 1 8 = CLG(E) , 1 6 9 ) . W e have, i n t h e c h a p t e r devoted t o Whitney
and h i s impact on S a u s s u r e ( s . l . 3 . l ) , g i v e n much a t t e n t i o n t o - t h e '
r e l a t i o n s h i p between t h e s e two s c h o l a r s , and no f u r t h e r proof is needed
t o i l l u s t r a t e S a u s s u r e ' s i n d e b t e d n e s s t o t h e American l i n g u i s t . Suffice
i t t o p o i n t o u t t h a t S a u s s u r e , i f w e t a k e h i s 1894 a n a l y s i s of Whitney's
c o n t r i b u t i o n t o general l i n g u i s t i c s a s our guide a s w e l l a s h i s l e c t u r e s
of 1907-11, c o u l d n o t p o s s i b l y h a v e drawn h i s i n s i g h t s i n t o t h e s e m i o t i c
n a t u r e of language from Whitney e x c l u s i v e l y , a s Engler (19 62 :35) a p p e a r s
t o suggest.
S a u s s u r e ' s c o n c e p t i o n of t h e arbitraire i s q u i t e d i s t i n c t from
t h a t of Whitney and a l s o , a s cannot b e s u f f i c i e n t l y s t r e s s e d , from t h e
i d e a s p u t forward by p h i l o s o p h e r s of language of e a r l i e r p e r i o d s . A s we
s h a l l t r y t o show i n t h e f o l l o w i n g c h a p t e r (2.2.3.2), t h e main r e a s o n
f o r t h e d i f f e r e n c e between t h e i r c o n c e p t i o n of t h e a r b i t r a r y n a t u r e of
- t h e s i g n and S a u s s u r e ' s i s t o b e found i n t h e s p e c i f i c Saussurean d e f i -
n i t i o n of t h e s i g n i t s e l f and i t s r e l a t i o n t o e x t r a - l i n g u i s t i c r e a l i t y .
I n Whitney's terms, language "is a body of a r b i t r a r y and c o n v e n t i o n a l
s i g n s f o r thought" ( s . LSL, 32 and 4lO), and h e does n o t seem t o v i s u -
a l i z e t h e b i l a t e r a l c h a r a c t e r of t h e s i g n i n a manner comparable t o
S a u s s u r e , i f h e recognized t h i s a t a l l ; h i s a p p a r e n t d i s t i n c t i o n between
"word" o r "vocable" and "thought" remains o b s c u r e i n t h i s r e s p e c t .
It i s f o r t h i s r e a s o n t h a t w e must c a s t doubt ( a s d i d C o s e r i u )
on t h e b e l i e f t h a t Whitney ought t o b e r e g a r d e d a s t h e e x c l u s i v e s o u r c e
of S a u s s u r e ' s concept of t h e m b i t r a i r e ( c f . Schaff, 1969: l 8 7 ) , and
reckon w i t h o t h e r i n f l u e n c e s , p o s s i b l y w i t h i d e a s which have t h e i r
s o u r c e i n Hegelian philosophy ( c f . C o s e r i u , l967a: 1 0 0 f f . ) 2 2 Thus i t
a p p e a r s w o r t h p o i n t i n g t o t h e work of t h e Danish p h i l o l o g i s t Johan
N i k o l a i Madvig (1804-86) who e x p r e s s e d i d e a s about t h e a r b i t r a r y n a t u r e
of t h e language s i g n which we b e l i e v e t o b e c l o s e r t o S a u s s u r e ' s t h a n
t h o s e of Whitney. I n h i s e s s a y of 1842, t r a n s l a t e d by t h e a u t h o r i n t o
German and p u b l i s h e d i n 1875 i n L e i p z i g , "ijber Wesen, Entwicklung und
Leben ' d e r Sprache", Madvig c h a r a c t e r i z e d t h e word a s a ' s i g n w i t h o u t
i m i t a t i o n ' , 23 and d e n i e s e x p r e s s l y t h e n e c e s s a r y r e l a t i o n s h i p between
sound and concept i n language:

Der Laut d e r Wzrter s t e h t a l s o i n keinem n a t i i r l i c h e n und

nothwendigen V e r h z l t n i s s z u r V o r s t e l l u n g und ihrem Gegen-
s t a n d . Madvig adds a few pages l a t e r : "So i s t d a s Wort
Zeichen e i n e r V o r s t e l l u n g , d i e e i n a n d e r e s Zeichen e r h a l t e n
haben kBnnte ... , w i e d i e s e r Laut d a s Zeichen e i n e r an-
d e r e n V o r s t e l l u n g geworden s e i n kijnnte. 24

In Madvig's f o r m u l a t i o n s we c a n d i s c e r n a t h r e e f o l d d i s t i n c t i o n between
sound, concept, and o b j e c t , s i m i l a r i n some wzy t o S a u s s u r e ' s ( i n par-
t i c u l a r h i s e a r l i e r ) views about t h e language s i g n . Madvig's d o u b l e
u s e of t h e term "Zeichen" a p p e a r s s i n g u l a r l y i n s t r u c t i v e s i n c e a s i m i l a r
25
o s c i l l a t i o n can b e d e t e c t e d i n S a u s s u r e ' s Cours.
Where t h e o r i g i n of S a u s s u r e ' s concept and term si%oZogie, which
S a u s s u r e a p p e a r s t o h a v e coined a t t h e t u r n of t h e c e n t u r y , a r e concerned,
t h e r e a r e p o s s i b l e t e r m i n o l o g i c a l a n t e c e d e n t s i n 1 8 t h c e n t u r y German
philosophy where " ~ e m i o t i k " and "semiotics" c a n b e found ( c f . D e Mauro,
1968:349, and n. l l ) , b u t t h e r e are no i n d i c a t i o n s t h a t S a u s s u r e ' s
u n d e r s t a n d i n g of t h e term (which h e d e r i v e d from Greek "semeion" ' s i g n ')
had b e e n f o r e s t a l l e d by t h e s e o r l a t e r p h i l o s o p h e r s . We a l s o doubt
whether S a u s s u r e was a c q u a i n t e d w i t h C h a r l e s Sanders P e i r c e (1839-1914)
and h i s s e m i o t i c t h e o r i e s o r w i t h t h e work of t h o s e s c h o l a r s who followed
him ( c f . ~ i c l > u , 1970:6), i n p a r t i c u l a r Lady V i c t o r i a Welby (1837 o r
1838-1912) who p u b l i s h e d a l e n g t h y s t u d y i n an a t t e m p t t o a c q u a i n t t h e
i n t e l l e c t u a l p u b l i c w i t h P e i r c e 's i d e a s i n 1903. 26 However, t o t r a c e
and a n a l y z e a l l t h o s e p o t e n t i a l s o u r c e s of S a u s s u r e ' s l i n g u i s t i c i n s p i -
r a t i o n , even i f i t i s r e s t r i c t e d t o h i s t h e o r y of t h e language s i g n o n l y ,
would r e q u i r e a book-length s t u d y of i t s own; o u r p r e s e n t o b s e r v a t i o n s
have t o remain i n c o n c l u s i v e u n t i l , a s C o s e r i u (1967a:112) s u g g e s t s , w e
know more a b o u t h i s p e r s o n a l l i b r a r y , t h e s t u d i e s h e c o n s u l t e d and h i s
other i n t e r e s t s . However, whatever t h e p a r t i c u l a r s o u r c e s of S a u s s u r e ' s
i n s p i r a t i o n might have been, whether we can o r cannot s p e c i f y which
s o u r c e may o r may n o t h a v e e x e r c i s e d some i n f l u e n c e on him, t h e f a c t
remains t h a t S a u s s u r e , as we s h a l l s e e i n t h e f o l l o w i n g c h a p t e r (s.2.2.3.2),
d i d make a number of i m p o r t a n t s u g g e s t i o n s on how a comprehensive g e n e r a l
t h e o r y of language based on s e m i o l o g i c a l p r i n c i p l e s s h o u l d b e c r e a t e d , a
t a s k which, a s t h e subsequent c h a p t e r (cf . 2.2.3.3) reveals, has not y e t
been performed some s i x t y y e a r s a f t e r its f o u n d a t i o n was l a i d by Saussure.
 I

FOOTNOTES 2.2.312.2.3.1

C f . E. F. K. Koerner, Contribution au dgbat post-saussurien sur

Ze signe Zinguistique: Introduction g6nZraZe e t bib Ziographie annot6e
(The Hague: Mouton, [ i n p r e s s ] ) .

It i s c u r i o u s t o n o t e t h a t Robins, l i k e o t h e r B r i t i s h l i n g u i s t s ,
e.g. J. R. F i r t h ( c f . PiL, and F i r t h , 1968) and J. Lyons (1968; c f .
a l s o t h e review i n Language 47:429-47 [ 1 9 7 1 ] ) , t e n d s t o i g n o r e modern
d i s c u s s i o n of t h e language s i g n almost completely ( s . Robins, 1964
[2nd ed., 19711 and 1967).

.
Cf Heinz Kronasser , Handbueh her Semesiologie: Kurze E i n f i r u n g
i n d i e Geschichte, ProbZematik und TerrninoZogie der BedeutungsZehre,
2nd ed. (Heidelberg: C. W i n t e r , l 9 6 8 ) , p. 28.
4
Coseriu, however, must b e c r i t i c i z e d f o r h i s u n q u a l i f i e d u s e of
FdS's terms of s i g n i f i g and s i g n i f i a n t when e x p l i c a t i n g t h e concepts
of t h e l i n g u i s t i c s i g n proposed by t h e Greeks ( c f . Coseriu, 1969: 40,
65, and elsewhere) i n s t e a d of p r e s e n t i n g them i n t h e framework of h i s
own terminology o n l y , t h u s a v o i d i n g s u b t l e s h i f t s i n meaning, and pre-
s e r v i n g h i s t o r i c a l v e r a c i t y and p h i l o s o p h i c a l e x a c t n e s s and o b j e c t i v i t y .

Cf. John Brough, "Theories of General L i n g u i s t i c s i n t h e S a n s k r i t

Grammars" TPS, 22-46 ( l 9 5 l ) , e s p . pp. 27-34, and K. Kunjunni R a j a ,
"Sphota: The Theory of L i n g u i s t i c Symbols", Adyar Library Bulletin
(Madris) 20:84-116 (1956); s. a l s o Barend A. Van Nooten, " P a n i n i ' s
Theory of V e r b a l Meaning", FL 5: 242-55 (1969) , .
It i s worth n o t i n g t h a t G . F. Meier h i m s e l f concluded (1961: 143)
a f t e r a d e t a i l e d d i s c u s s i o n of t h i s problem (pp. 1 4 0 f f . ) : "Eine Vor-
g e s c h i c h t e f i i r d a s Z&O-problem i s t jedoch b e i den i n d i s c h e n Grammatikern
. .
schwer zu f i n d e n . I' Cf however t h e v i e w s of W.S A l l e n , "Zero and Pznini",
I L 16:106-13 (1955) and, more r e c e n t l y , t h o s e of S e r g i u Al-George,
II
The Semiosis of Zero a c c o r d i n g t o PZnini", East and West (Rome) 17:
115-24 (1967), and idem, "L'Inde a n t i t l u e e t l e s o r i g i n e s du s t r u c t u r a l i s m e " ,
A[IO]CIL 11, 235-40 (1970), a t p. 236.
7
Cf. a l s o t h e b r i e f survey of t h e t r a d i t o n a l d i s t i n c t i o n between
.
signans and s i g m t m i n O r t i g u e s , 1962: 56-8. S now R . Simone's r e c e n t
a r t i c l e , "Semiologia a g o s t i a n a " , Cultura 7: 88-117 (1969) .
 It a p p e a r s t h a t u n t i l today no s u c h s t u d y e x i s t s ; a t least t h e r e
i s a n a r t i c l e by U. S a a r n i o on t h e 1 2 t h c e n t u r y which d e a l s w i t h t h e
s i g n c o n c e p t , "Betrachtungen iibe'r d i e s c h o l a s t i s c h e Lehre d e r Wcrter
a l s Zeichen", A c t a Acad. Paedagogicae JyvlEskyliiensis ( ~ y v ~ s k y l ~ / F i n l a n d )
17: 215-49 (1959).

Cf. W. James, The P r i n c i p l e s of Psychology, v o l . I1 (New York:

. H. Holt & Co., 1890; r e p r . New York: Dover, 1950), p. 356.

lo See IV& ~ S n a g y , "fiber d i e E i g e n a r t d e s s p r a c h l i c h e n Zeichens:

Bemerkungen zu e i n e r a l t e n S t r e i t f r a g e " , Lingua 6:67-88, and idem, "Con-
t r i b u t i o n t o t h e p h y s e i - t h e s e i Debate", Omagiu R o s e t t i , 251-7 (1965
[l966]).

l1 W e have argued e l s e w h e r e t h a t i t would much more f r u i t f u l t o

c o n s i d e r more immediate s o u r c e s of S a u s s u r e ' s i n s p i r a t i o n t h a n t h o s e
which appear t o have been, though i n a r a t h e r u n s p e c i f i e d manner, common
p r o p e r t y among language t h e o r e t i c i a n s and p h i l o s o p h e r s a l i k e . Cf. t h e
c h a p t e r , "Le s i g n e l i n g u i s t i q u e chez F. d e S a u s s u r e e t son o r i g i n e " ,
i n t h e forthcoming work r e f e r r e d t o i n n o t e 1.

l2A s C o s e r i u (Zoc. c i t . ) p o i n t s o u t , "ex institute" o r "ad placitum"

are t h e e x p r e s s i o n s which B o e t h i u s employed i n h i s t r a n s l a t i o n of A r i s -
t o t l e ' s Karo UUV$?IKTIV. Joseph Engels, i n h i s a r t i c l e "Origine, s e n s e t
s u r v i e du terme bogcien 'secundum placitum", V i v a r i m (AssenINetherlands)
1:87-114 (1963), r e j e c t s t h e t r a d i t i o n a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of A r i s t o t l e ' s
term a s e i t h e r "conventional" o r " a r b i t r a r y " , o b j e c t i o n s which have been
r e f u t e d by C o s e r i u (1969:66-7). I t i s worth p o i n t i n g o u t ( w i t h C o s e r i u ,
1967a:87-8, and 1969:65ff.) t h a t A r i s t o t l e d i d n o t make u s e of t h e t h e n
a l r e a d y g e n e r a l l y e s t a b l i s h e d o p p o s i t i o n of t h g s e i v s . p h g s e i .

l3 Cf. H. E. B r e k l e , "Semiotik und l i n g u i s t i s c h e Semanrik i n P o r t -

Royal", IF 69 :103-21 (1964) .
.
l4 See Th Jouf f r o y , Nouveaw m z lunges p h i Zosophiques ed by P h i l i p p e .
Damiron ( P a r i s : J o u b e r t , 1842), 363-410; h e r e pp. 380-81. Note t h a t t h i s
volume was r e - e d i t e d s e v e r a l t i m e s ; t h e 4 t h ed. appeared i n 1882 ( P a r i s :
Hachette) .
l5Op. c i t . , 371 and 373 r e s p e c t i v e l y . Cf. a l s o : "Le s i g n e a r t i -
f i c i e l a c e l a d e s p 6 c i a l , que l e r a p p o r t q u i l ' u n i t 2 l a c h o s e s i g n i f i g e
n ' a p o i n t 6t6 g t a b l i p a r l a n a t u r e , mais p a r l'homme, q u i a a r b i t r a i r e -
ment c h o i s i c e s i g n e pour s i g n i f i e r c e t t e chose." ( B i d . , 398).

l6p. c i t . , 3 9 8 f Cf. J o u f f r o y ' s s t a t e m e n t : "Ainsi l a c o r r g l a t i o n

du s i g n e a l a c h o s e s i g n i f i 6 e p e u t b i e n g t r e n a t u r e l l e , mais e l l e n ' e s t
p a s n i f a t a l e n i n g c e s s a i r e , p u i s q u ' e l l e p e u t S t r e suspendue, supprim6e,
t r a n s f o r m 6 e en une c o r r z l a t i o n c o n t r a i r e . " (Up. c i t . , 385). And: "Le
c r i p e u t b i e n s t r e l ' e f f e t d e l a d o u l e u r , mais non c o m e s i g n e . C o m e
s i g n e , il exprime l a d o u l e u r e t r i e n d e p l u s " (p. 392).
 Bid., 393. A l l q u o t a t i o n s from J o u f f r o y have been t a k e n from
C o s e r i u (1967a:96-7), where f u r t h e r c i t a t i o n s p e r t a i n i n g t o t h e t h e o r y
of t h e s i g n as. developed by J o u f f r o y can b e found.

l8 The r e l e v a n t p a s s a g e d a t e s back t o 1894 when FdS w r o t e h i s a p p r a i -

s a l of Whitney's work ( c f . CLG(E), 1 6 9 ) .

l9 Cf. Language and the Study of Language (New York: Appleton;

London: Triibner, 1867), 3rd ed., "augmented by an a n a l y s i s " (op. c i t . ,
491-505), 1870, pp. 1 4 , 32, 71, 102, 438, and, d e f i n i n g words a s
" a r b i t r a r y s i g n s f o r thought", p. 410; The Life and Growth of Language
(New York: Appleton; London: King, 1875), l a s t r e p r i n t , 1901, pp. 19,
24 and 282..

20 Cf. Whitney's programmatic s t a t e m e n t , " ~ G U C I o r 8 i o ~ 1 - N a t u r a l

o r Conventional?", TAPA 5:95-116 (1874). I n h i s L i f e and Growth of
Language Whitney a f f i r m e d , a f t e r having s t a t e d t h a t "every word ...
i n e v e r y human language i s a n a r b i t r a r y and c o n v e n t i o n a l s i g n t ' , t h a t
t h e word " e x i s t s 8&e1, 'by a t t r i b u t i o n ' , and n o t @ ~ U C I , 'by n a t u r e 1 ' '
(p. 1 9 ) . Whitney extended t h i s i d e a l a t e r on i n t e r p r e t i n g t h z s e i a s
"by a n a c t of a t t r i b u t i o n t ' and r e j e c t i n g t h e argument t h a t onomatopoeia
c o n s t i t u t e s a n e x c e p t i o n t o t h i s f a c t (p. 282).

21 There i s , however, no i n d i c a t i o n t h a t FdS i s c o r r e c t when h e

a t t r i b u t e s t o Whitney t h e b e l i e f t h a t man had chosen t h e v o i c e a s t h e
prime means of communication b e c a u s e i t was "plus commode" t h a n o t h e r
means. I n f a c t Whitney s t a t e d t h a t i n t h e c o u r s e of man's e x p e r i e n c e
"it h a s come t o l i g h t t h a t t h e v o i c e i s , on t h e whole, t h e most a v a i l a b l e
means of communicaticn" i n p a r t i c u l a r b e c a u s e v o i c e "most e a s i l y compels
a t t e n t i o n from any d i r e c t i o n " and b e c a u s e of i t s a p p a r e n t economy:
'I
Only t h e s m a l l e s t p a r t of i t s c a p a c i t i e s a r e l a i d under c o n t r i b u t i o n
f o r t h e u s e s of speech; of t h e i n d e f i n i t e number of d i s t i n g u i s h a b l e
sounds which i t can produce, o n l y a f r a c t i o n , of twelve t o f i f t y , a r e
p u t t o u s e i n any one language" (LGL, 293).

22 FdS c o u l d h a v e absorbed H e g e l ' s i d e a s through V i c t o r Henry's

(1850-1907) monograph, Antinomies Zinguistiques ( P a r i s : F. Alcan, 1 8 9 6 ) ,
- c f . H. S c h u c h a r d t ' s review i n LGRP 18, c o l l . 238-47 (1897) - i n which
Henry c a l l e d language "une convention a u s s i a r b i t r a i r e qu'un r g p e r t o i r e
d e s i g n a u x i n t e r n a t i o n a u x " (p. 3 9 ) , summarizing h i s argument by s a y i n g
t h a t " t o u t l a n g a g e e s t c o n v e n t i o n n e l , e t p o u r t a n t l e l a n g a g e e s t un f a i t
n a t u r e l " (p. 43). Note t h a t FdS, i n a p o s t s c r i p t t o h i s l e t t e r of
S e p t . 23rd, 1907 t o M e i l l e t , wrote: " J ' a v a i s a p p r i s avec c h a g r i n l a
mort d e M. V i c t o r Henry. Quoique j e n e f u s s e pas p a r t i c u l i & e m e n t l i 6
avec l u i , nous a v i o n s p l u s d ' u n e f o i s correspondu." (CFS 21:115 [19641).

23 See J. N. Madvig, Kleine philologische S c h r i f t e n ( L e i p z i g :

B. G. Teubner, 1875), 48-97, a t p-. 52. This volume of over 500 pages
has b e e n r e p r i n t e d , Hildesheim: G. O l m s , 1966.
 24
Op. c i t . , pp. 59 and 62 r e s p e c t i v e l y . On t h e same page Madvig
s t a t e d t h a t t h e s p e c i f i c , i . e . f o r m a t i v e , a r t i c u l a t i o n s of sound a r e
n o t n e c e s s a r i l y r e l a t e d t o t h e s p e c i f i c s t r u c t u r e of t h e c o n t e n t of t h e
.
concept. Cf C o s e r i u (l967a: 103) f o r f u r t h e r q u o t a t i o n s .

25 I n our account of t h e post-Saussurean d i s c u s s i o n of t h e l a n -

guage s i g n ( r e f e r r e d t o i n n o t e s 1 and 9 of t h i s c h a p . ) , w e s u g g e s t e d
t h a t t h e works of o t h e r contemporary l i n g u i s t s , such a s t h o s e by M.
~ r g a l ,C. S v e d e l i u s , K. 0 . Erdmann, K. Nyrop, and o t h e r s which were pub-
l i s h e d between 1891 and 1904, could a l s o have had a n impact on FdS.
.
C f P a u l v a l & r y l s review of ~ r g a l ' sEssai de s6mntique reproduced i n
CFS 21: 132-3 (1964).

26 V. Welby, f i a t i s Meaning? Studies i n the Devezoprnent of Signifies

(London: Macmillan, 1903) .
 2.2.3.2 S a u s s u r e ' s Theory o f t h e Language S i g n and t h e
Semio.logica1 N a t u r e o f Language

< Le Zangage n lest r i e n de plus qu ' >

un cas p a r t i c u l i e r de Za ~ h g o r i edes
Signes. < Mais pr6cis6ment, par ce >
seuZ f a i t , i Z se trouve dGj2 dans Z '
impossibiZt6 absoZue d ' s t r e une chose
simple ...
F. d e S a u s s u r e i n 1894 ( s . CFS 12:65)

... ce n lest qu 'en gtudiant Zes

signes dans Za Zangue qu 'on en con-
naz^tra Zes co^te's essentiels, Za v i e .
[De sorte que] Zre'tude de Za langue
f a i t e par d 'autres que des linguistes
n 'attaque pas l e s u j e t par ses co^t6s
essentiels. C'est ce qui f a i t que Ze
suj e t s e'mioZogique n 'apparazt pas
quand on Z 'Ztudie sous d'autres
points de vue que Za langue ...
F. d e S a u s s u r e i n 1908 (CFS 15:20)

A s we have mentioned on o c c a s i o n ( c f . 1 . 1 ) and i l l u s t r a t e d i n an

e a r l i e r c h a p t e r devoted t o t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between h i s t o r i c a l and des-
c r i p t i v e a s p e c t s of language s t u d y ( s . 2.2.2.2), one c a n almost s p e a k
of a l i n e of s t e a d y p r o g r e s s i o n i n t h e e v o l u t i o n of S a u s s u r e ' s l i n -
g u i s t i c t h o u g h t , a n i m p r e s s i o n which . C r i s t i n a V a l l i n i h a s r e c e n t l y t r i e d
t o s u b s t a n t i a t e , though mainly w i t h r e g a r d t o d i a c h r o n i c problems i n
language s t u d y ( c f . V a l l i n i , 1969:49ff.; c f . a l s o SM, 2 4 ) . Moreover,
t h e r e a d e r of today w i l l b e s t r u c k by t h e f o r m a l c l a r i t y of e x p o s i t i o n
and t h e f o r c e f u l n e s s which t h e i n g e n i o u s work of t h e twenty-year-old
. S a u s s u r e e x h i b i t s , i m p r e s s i o n s which remain c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of S a u s s u r e ' s
whole work.
Thus t h e young s t u d e n t of l i n g u i s t i c s a t L e i p z i g n o t only proposed
i n h i s ~Gmoiret o e s t a b l i s h " l e s y s t s m e d e s v o y e l l e s dans s o n ensemble"
(RecueiZ, 3 ) , a s u g g e s t e d g o a l which s h o u l d n o t b e confused w i t h t h e
I
almost popular u s e S a u s s u r e ' s cohtemporaries had of t h e t e r m 'sys &me',
b u t h e a l s o made r i g o r o u s u s e of 'systemt as a concept u n d e r l y i n g h i s
argument and i n a manner h i t h e r t o unknown i n t h e l i n g- u i s t i c l i t e r a t u r e
3
o f t h e p e r i o d . 2 I n a d d i t i o n , S a u s s u r e e i t h e r i n t r o d u c e d new terms
or extended t h e i r p r e v i o u s meaning ( a s i n t h e c a s e of 'system', for
4
instance), and t h i s i s i n d i c a t i v e of h i s own l i n g u i s t i c c r e a t i v i t y
and d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h t r a d i t i o n a l c o n c e p t s , methods and terminology,
and t h e s e a s p e c t s of h i s c h a r a c t e r seem t o have been t h e most predominant
i n h i s teaching. A s i n g l e p a s s a g e from t h e Mgmoire may b e quoted t o
i l l u s t r a t e our point. R e j e c t i n g t h e views of h i s p r e d e c e s s o r s c o n c e r n i n g
t h e o r i g i n a l vowel system i n h e r e n t i n t h e European languages S a u s s u r e
o u t l i n e d t h e purpose of h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n a s f o l l o w s :

Notre t k h e s e r a d e m e t t r e en l u m i s r e l e f a i t q u ' i l s ' a g i t

en r g a l i t g d e q u a t r e termes d i f f g r e n t s , e t non t r o i s ; que
les idiomes du nord o n t l a i s s 6 s e confondre deux phon2mes
fondamentalement d i s t i n c t s e t e n c o r e d i s t i n g u g s a u sud d e
1'Europe: a , v o y e l l e s i m p l e , opposge 2 1'5; ...(RecueiZ,
6-7; o u t i t a l i c s ) . 5

Although we a r e v e r y much aware of t h e danger of o v e r i n t e r p r e t i n g o r

even m i s i n t e r p r e t i n g t h e i n t e n d e d meaning of t h e e x p r e s s i o n s i n t h e
above c i t a t i o n i n t h e l i g h t of c u r r e n t usage, t h e s t r o n g i m p r e s s i o n
remains t h a t S a u s s u r e d i d n o t t r e a t t h e Indo-European vowels a s p h y s i c a l
e n t i t i e s ( t o b e r e c o n s t r u c t e d o r p o s t u l a t e d by t h e l i n g u i s t as i f t h e y
had an e x i s t e n c e a t an e a r l i e r s t a g e i n language developkent) b u t a s
formal terms which h a v e e x i s t e n c e o n l y a s a r e s u l t of t h e i r i n t e r r e l a t i o n
w i t h and c o n t r a s t t o o t h e r terms of t h e same system ( c f . 2.2.5.2; cf.
Lepschy, 1970: 42) . I n h i s f i r s t c o u r s e on g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s , S a u s s u r e
made an e x p l i c i t s t a t e m e n t t o t h i s e f f e c t when h e s u g g e s t e d t h a t , i n
d e a l i n g w i t h a p a r t i c u l a r phoneme, "on p o u r r a i t , sans s p z c i f i e r sa n a t u r e
phonique, l e c a t a l o g u e r e t l e r e p r & e n t e r p a r s o n num6ro dans l e t a b l e a u
des phonsmes indo-europ6ens. " (CLG, 303; CLG(E) , 496; our i t a l i c s ; cf .
SM, 65). I n a d d i t i o n t o S a u s s u r e ' s s t r i k i n g l y c o n s i s t e n t u s e of phonzme
i n s t e a d of sound i n t h e moire ,6 a f a c t which ought t o h a v e a r o u s e d
some c u r i o s i t y a t least among h i s t o r i a n s of l i n g u i s t i c s who t e n d t o
a t t r i b u t e t h e e l a b o r a t i o n of t h e ' t e r m t o Baudouin d e Courtenay and Kru-
7
szewski ( c f . 1.3.3.1), t h e term vaZeur o c c u r s on s e v e r a l o c c a s i o n s
whenever S a u s s u r e wishes t o p o i n t t o t h e i d e n t i t y of a g i v e n phone'me
o r t o d i s t i n g u i s h between two s u c h e n t i t i e s ( c f . RecueiZ, 111 b u t a l s o
114) .
There a r e even i n d i c a t i o n s t h a t , i n h i s " e n f a n t i l l a g e " of 1872
( c f . CFS 17:17), S a u s s u r e e n v i s a g e d some kind of fundamental s y s t e m of
s i g n s from which a l l o t h e r languages h a v e d e r i v e d , when a s a boy of
f i f t e e n h e a t t e m p t e d t o r e c o n s t r u c t what h e t h e n imagined t o b e t h e
o r i g i n a l r o o t s of t h r e e chosen Indo-European languages, a t t r i b u t i n g
t o t h e b a s i c consonants p, t, and k a p a r t i c u l a r meaning.' Suffice it
t o n o t e t h a t t h e concept of t h e language s i g n , t h e t o p i c of t h i s c h a p t e r ,
may w e l l h a v e had i t s s t a t u n a s c e n d i i n S a u s s u r e ' s e a r l y a t t e m p t s a t
c o n s t r u c t i n g a "systsme u n i v e r s e 1 du langage" ({bid.). It cannot b e
s u f f i c i e n t l y s t r e s s e d t h a t S a u s s u r e ' s concept of t h e language s i g n
cannot b e d i v o r c e d from h i s g e n e r a l t h e o r y of language a s a system of
i n t e r d e p e n d e n t , d i s t i n c t i v e and c o n t r a s t i n g terms and a s a p a r t i c u l a r
form w i t h i n t h e whole body of s e m i o l o g i c a l f a c t s . Godel, who d i s c u s s e d
t h e concept of t h e a p p a r e n t l y v a r i o u s c o n c e p t i o n s of t h e phoneme i n
S a u s s u r e a t some l e n g t h ( s . SM, 158-68), seems t o b e somewhat puzzled
by t h e numerous and d i v e r g e n t views expressed i n S a u s s u r e ' s t e a c h i n g s
a t d i f f e r e n t times and i n d i f f e r e n t c o n t e x t s . We n o t e w i t h s u r p r i s e
however t h a t Godel b a s e s h i s a n a l y s i s almost e x c l u s i v e l y on s t u d e n t s '
n o t e s from t h e l a s t few y e a r s of S a u s s u r e ' s academic c a r e e r , q u o t i n g
o n l y from one o f S a u s s u r e ' s m a n u s c r i p t s of t h e m i d - n i n e t i e s i n which t h e
phoneme i s envisaged a s a complex u n i t combining a c o u s t i c and a r t i c u -
l a t o r y f e a t u r e s ( c f . SM, 1 6 1 ) , a l t h o u g h t h e r e e x i s t a number of o t h e r
papers from S a u s s u r e ' s own pen, many of them s t i l l unpublished, which
would l e a d t o q u i t e d i f f e r e n t c o n c l u s i o n s .
S a u s s u r e ' s r e p e a t e d u s e of "image a c o u s t i q u e " and "impression acous-
t i q u e " i n h i s p s y c h o l o g i c a l approach t o i d e n t i f y t h e phoneme a s a b a s i c
l i n g u i s t i c u n i t ( c f . SM, 161-3 [ p a s s i m ] ) , ought t o have s u g g e s t e d t o
Godel t h a t t h e seemingly d i v e r g i n g u s e s of t h e t e r m c a n b e e x p l a i n e d
by t h e v a r i o u s c o n t e x t s i n which' S a u s s u r e speaks of t h e phoneme. Since
S a u s s u r e d i d n o t t h i n k t h a t p h o n e t i c s c o n s t i t u t e d a p r o p e r o b j e c t of
l i n g u i s t i c s b u t o n l y a n a u x i l i a r y d i s c i p l i n e ( c f . CLG(E), 9 1 f . ) , b o t h
t h e p h y s i o l o g i c a l and a c o u s t i c a s p e c t s of t h e phoneme were of no p a r t i c u l a r
i n t e r e s t t o him ( c f . SM, 1 6 4 ) . To a c e r t a i n e x t e n t Godel i s c o r r e c t i n
a r g u i n g t h a t Saussure, i n employing t h e term 'phoneme', wished t o d i s -
t i n g u i s h i t from t h e mere sound, t h e b a s i c u n i t of p h o n e t i c s (SM, 165),
b u t we t e n d t o d i s a g r e e w i t h h i s c l a i m t h a t t h e phoneme was r e g a r d e d
b y S a u s s u r e a s o n l y one p a r t of t h e l i n g u i s t i c s i g n , i . e . t h e s i g n i f i a n t
( c f . SM, 162 and 165). Godel h i m s e l f ( u n w i t t i n g l y perhaps) q u o t e s p a s s a g e s
from s t u d e n t s ' n o t e s t a k e n d u r i n g S a u s s u r e ' s f i r s t c o u r s e on g e n e r a l
l i n g u i s t i c s which would s u g g e s t t h e f o l l o w i n g development of S a u s s u r e ' s
thought: F i r s t l y , t h e i s o l a t e d phoneme as a n a c o u s t i c o r p h y s i o l o g i c a l
e n t i t y i s of no i n t e r e s t t o t h e l i n g u i s t ( c f . SM, 162); secondly, t h e
phoneme i n t h e manner S a u s s u r e envisaged i t c a n b e r e l e v a n t i f one c a n
a t t r i b u t e t o it a value ( v a l e w ) , i.e. identify it a s an "unit6 signi-
f i c a t i v e " which c a n b e c o n t r a s t e d w i t h o t h e r u n i t s b e l o n g i n g t o t h e same
system ( c f . SM, 165) ;lof i n a l l y , S a u s s u r e f e l t t h a t h e had t o d i s c a r d
t h e term 'phoneme' w i t h r e f e r e n c e t o t h e s i g n b e c a u s e i t c o n t a i n e d "1'
i d 6 e d ' a c t i o n v o c a l e l ' ( c f . SM, 1 6 2 ) , a term which h e t h e n r e p l a c e d by
11image acoustique".

Godel (SM, 152, 162, 192) p o i n t s o u t t h a t "image a c o u s t i q u e " meant

on o c c a s i o n n o t merely t h e " p a r t i e m a t 6 r i e l l e " of t h e s i g n b u t t h e s i g n
i n its totality. This f a c t would s u p p o r t our c l a i m t h a t S a u s s u r e had
s e r i o u s l y toyed w i t h t h e i d e a of a t t r i b u t i n g t o t h e phoneme t h e v a l u e
of t h e b a s i c u n i t of t h e system of language, i. e. t h e s i g n , a c o n t e n t i o n
which would appear t o b e s u b s t a n t i a t e d by h i s h i t h e r t o unpublished
p a p e r s devoted t o p h o n e t i c c o n s i d e r a t i o n s of language i n which "phoneme"
11
h a s been equated w i t h "valeur s6miologique". Moreover, i t i s i m p o r t a n t
t o n o t e t h a t , i f we i g n o r e h i s e x e m p l i f i c a t i o n of t h e concept of s y n t a g -
m a t i c r e l a t i o n s i n language ( c f . CLG, 1 7 0 f f . ; c f . 2.2.4.2), Saussure
demonstrated c o n s i s t e n t l y t h e s y s t e m a t i c c h a r a c t e r of language on t h e
level 'of phonology, from t h e ~Zrnoiredown t o h i s f i n a l c o u r s e on g e n e r a l
l i n g u i s t i c s , e x c e p t f o r t h o s e ( r a r e ) o c c a s i o n s when examples from morpho-
l o g y were chosen.12 S i n c e S a u s s u r e n e i t h e r f u l l y developed a t h e o r y of
s i g n s b a s e d on t h e phoneme nor e x p l a i n e d why h e abandoned t h i s concept
i n f a v o u r of t h e much more vague concept of t h e word, one c a n o n l y specu-
l a t e about h i s motives. S u f f i c e i t t o n o t e t h a t t h e s e e a r l y i d e a s con-
c e r n i n g t h e phoneme, which h e modified b u t never completely abandoned,
and which t a k e up major p o r t i o n s of t h e c h a p t e r s on t h e " v a l e u r l i n -
g u i s t i q u e c o n s i d g r g e dans son a s p e c t mat6rie11' and t h e l ' s i g n e c o n s i d e r 6
dans sa t o t a l i t 6 " (CLG, 163-9), h a v e proved f r u i t f u l i n t h e development
of s t r u c t u r a l phonology a s c r e a t e d by Trubeckoj, R. Jakobson, A. M a r t i n e t ,
13
and many o t h e r members of t h e Prague s c h o o l ( c f . 2.3).
I f t h e phoneme continued t o p l a y a n i m p o r t a n t r $ l e i n S a u s s u r e ' s
t h e o r y of t h e language s i g n , i t was i n i t s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n a s a n ' a c o u s t i c
image', language b e i n g d e f i n e d a s "un syst2me d e s i g n e s r e p o s a n t s u r l e s
images a c o u s t i q u e s , o; l e s deux p a r t i e s du s i g n e s o n t psychiques" (SM,
162). Godel, who s u b j e c t e d b o t h s t u d e n t s ' n o t e s and p a p e r s from S a u s s u r e
h i m s e l f t o a c l o s e a n a l y s i s i n o r d e r t o e l u c i d a t e S a u s s u r e ' s c o n c e p t of
t h e language s i g n ( s . SM, lgO-203), observed t h a t t h e d o u b l e a c c e p t a n c e
of t h e word ' s i g n e ' never ceased t o embarrass him (SM, 1 9 2 ) . In his
u n f i n i s h e d paper on Whitney of 1894 ( c f . 1 . 3 . 1 ) , Saussure o u t l i n e d ,
f o r t h e f i r s t t i m e i t would seem, h i s i d e a s about t h e s e m i o l o g i c a l n a t u r e
of language, and spoke of a " c o n t r a t fondamental e n t r e l ' e s p r i t e t l e
s i g n e " (l894:g) ; t h e example h e o f f e r e d i n t h e subsequent p a r a g r a p h s
shows t h a t h e employed t h e term ' s i g n e ' i n i t s t r a d i t i o n a l (grammatical)
sense.14 S i g n i f i c a n t l y , S a u s s u r e argued, i n n o t e s h e p r e p a r e d f o r a
c o u r s e on morphology of roughly t h e same p e r i o d ( l 8 9 4 / 9 5 ) , t h a t t h e
t r u e name of morphology would be: " l a t h g o r i e d e s s i g n e s , e t non d e s
formes", adding t h a t t h e s p e a k e r "n'a c o n s c i e n c e du s o n que comme s i g n e . "
(Geneva School Reader, 28). A s S a u s s u r e ' s f r e q u e n t u s e of t h e game of
c h e s s a s an i l l u s t r a t i o n of t h e mechanism of language would s u g g e s t ,
h e was c l e a r l y i n c l i n e d towards a f a i r l y a b s t r a c t s i g n t h e o r y . l5 But
t h e concept of t h e s i g n , d e s p i t e t h e f a c t t h a t i t was conceived of i n a
f o r m a l i z e d manner, appears t o r e t a i n i t s meaning of " s i g n i f i a n t " , since
S a u s s u r e speaks of t h e " r e l a t i o n ' i n t g r i e u r e du s i g n e avec 1'id6e9' (189 4: 12) .
However, S a u s s u r e ' s p o s i t i o n on t h i s i s s u e i s n o t a t a l l c l e a r ; h i s
a d d i t i o n a l u s e of t h e term 'symbole' i n t h e p l a c e of ' s i g n e ' obscures
h i s argument. Moreover, h i s c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n of language as "ce syst5me
p a r t i c u l i e r d e symboles indzpendants " (p. 13) s u g g e s t s t h a t S a u s s u r e
i m p l i e d b o t h t h e " s i g n i f i a n t " and t h e " s i g n i f i 6 " , terms h e d i d n o t ' i n t r o -
duce b e f o r e t h e l a s t c o u r s e on g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s ( l 9 l O I l l ) .
Whatever S a u s s u r e 's e a r l y c o n c e p t i o n of t h e l i n g u i s t i c s i g n may
have been, two o b s e r v a t i o n s which S a u s s u r e made i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h t h e
s i g n i n h i s 1894 paper d e s e r v e s p e c i a l a t t e n t i o n , f o r b o t h of them have
had an impact on 20th c e n t u r y d i s c u s s i o n s of t h e t h e o r y of s i g n s , one
p o s i t i v e , t h e o t h e r mainly n e g a t i v e . F i r s t l y , t h e r e is Saussure's
c l a i m t h a t language i s n o t more ( b u t n o t l e s s ) t h a n "un c a s p a r t i c u l i e r
du s i g n e " (1894:26a) and a "sgmiologie p a r t i c u l i & e l ' (p. 31) whose
complexity cannot b e s u f f i c i e n t l y s t r e s s e d . Secondly, i n s p i r e d by s i m i l a r
c l a i m s made by Whitney t o t h i s e f f e c t ( c f . 1 . 3 . 1 ) , S a u s s u r e p o s s i b l y made
h i s f i r s t a t t e m p t s t o f o r m u l a t e t h e p r i n c i p l e of t h e arbitraire.
Where t h e s e m i o l o g i c a l n a t u r e of language i n g e n e r a l i s concerned,
w e a r e n o t y e t i n a p o s i t i o n t o g i v e a n a d e q u a t e p i c t u r e of t h e
e v o l u t i o n of t h i s i d e a i n S a u s s u r e ' s l i n g u i s t i c thought. I n h i s 1894
n o t e s S a u s s u r e only h i n t s a t a semiology, i t s c o n v e n t i o n a l and s o c i a l
c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , b u t does n o t a t t e m p t a t h e o r e t i c a l o u t l i n e . The few
pages from o t h e r n o t e s w r i t t e n d u r i n g t h e same p e r i o d which h a v e b e e n
p u b l i s h e d s o f a r ( s . CFS 12:68-70) do n o t p e r m i t f u r t h e r c o n c l u s i o n s ,
and o t h e r s t a t e m e n t s , except f o r a few q u o t a t i o n s i n Godel (SM, 48-9),
have n o t y e t been made a v a i l a b l e . L a t e r a f f i r m a t i o n s of S a u s s u r e ' s
are l i m i t e d t o 1 ) an i n d i r e c t s t a t e m e n t a b o u t t h e importance "d'une
s c i e n c e t r & ggngrale" which h e c a l l e d s6miologie and about t h e p l a c e
of l i n g u i s t i c s w i t h i n t h i s semiology, a s r e l a t e d by A. N a v i l l e i n h i s
NouvelZe cZassification des sciences of 1901, 2) a few p a s s a g e s i n t h e
r e c o n s t r u c t e d I n t r o d u c t i o n t o S a u s s u r e ' s second c o u r s e of 190819 ( c f .
CFS 15: 24-30) , and 3) t h e few r e l e v a n t o b s e r v a t i o n s made i n t h e Cours
of 1916 ( c f . CLG, 33-5, l o o f . , lO7f., 111) .I6 A b r i e f q u o t a t i o n from
N a v i l l e ' s book, though a f u l l e r q u o t a t i o n h a s a l r e a d y b e e n made towards
t h e end o f c h a p t e r 1.2.1.1, appears q u i t e informative because i t i n d i c a t e s
a n a p p a r e n t s h i f t from t h e p h o n o l o g i c a l and morphological e n t i t i e s t o
t h e word a s t h e l i n g u i s t i c s i g n p r o p e r i n S a u s s u r e ' s l a t e r u n d e r s t a n d i n g .
Claiming t h a t l i n g u i s t i c s c o n s t i t u t e s t h e most advanced component o f
s e m i o l o g i c a l s c i e n c e , t h e f o l l o w i n g q u o t a t i o n from N a v i l l e w i l l r e v e a l
S a u s s u r e ' s argument:

La phonoZogie e t l a morphoZogie t r a i t e n t s u r t o u t d e s mots,

l a szmantique du s e n s d e s mots. Mais il y a c e r t a i n e m e n t
a c t i o n r & i p r o q u e d e s mots s u r l e u r s e n s e t du s e n s s u r
les mots; v o u l o i r sGparer c e s Gtudes l ' u n e 2 l ' a u t r e c e
s e r a i t ma1 comprendre l e u r s o b j e t s . (1901:104).

The s e m i o l o g i c a l n a t u r e of language h a s i t s main s o u r c e i n t h e

f a c t t h a t language i s a s o c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n making u s e of a s y s t e m of
conventional signs. The c o l l e c t i v e o r , what amounts t o t h e same, s o c i a l
a s p e c t r e p r e s e n t s t h e condieio s i n e qua non f o r a l l o t h e r s e m i o l o g i c a l
systems, e . g . t h e i n t e r n a t i o n a l s i g n s used i n n a v i g a t i o n , t h e s i g n
language of t h e deaf-mutes, and o t h e r codes ( c f . CFS 15: 24ff .) . It i s
a s a r e s u l t of comparing language w i t h o t h e r s i g n systems t h a t S a u s s u r e
d i s m i s s e s t h e v o c a l a s p e c t of l a n g u a g e a s an e s s e n t i a l component of i t s
n a t u r e ( c f . CFS 15:25) ,I7 and indeed S a u s s u r e p o i n t s o u t t h a t h e r e g a r d s
( a r t i c u l a t o r y ) p h o n e t i c s n o t o n l y a s a n a u x i l i a r y s c i e n c e of l i n g u i s t i c s
b u t "absolument dehors d e l a l i n g u i s t i q u e " b e c a u s e i t h a s no p l a c e i n
18
h i s d e f i n i t i o n of language a s a s e m i o l o g i c a l system ( i b i d . , 3 0 ) .
The second i m p o r t a n t a s p e c t a l r e a d y p u t forward i n S a u s s u r e ' s n o t e s
of 1894, namely t h e p r i n c i p l e of t h e a r b i t r a r y n a t u r e of t h e language
s i g n , i s c l o s e l y r e l a t e d t o h i s view of language a s a s e m i o l o g i c a l system.
S i n c e t h e s i g n s used by t h e community have p r e v i o u s l y been s e t up by i t s
members and agreed upon, t h e y a r e c o n v e n t i o n a l and t h u s a r b i t r a r y .
This appears' t o b e t h e e s s e n c e of S a u s s u r e ' s argument i n 1894 when h e
d i s c u s s e d t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n s made by Whitney t o g e n e r a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s
of language s t u d y , and, a s we h a v e demonstrated e a r l i e r i n t h i s work
(cf. 1.3.1), S a u s s u r e t h e n was s t r o n g l y i n f l u e n c e d by Whitney's c o n t e n t i o n s
about t h e a r b i t r a r y and c o n v e n t i o n a l n a t u r e of t h e word. It was however
S a u s s u r e ' s e x t e n s i o n of t h e s e clhims which h a s proved u n f o r t u n a t e and
in f a c t damaging t o h i s t h e o r y of t h e arbitraire e s p e c i a l l y s i n c e t h e
e d i t o r s decided t o i n t e g r a t e t h i s m i s l e a d i n g n o t i o n i n t o t h e Corns
( c f . CLG, 1 0 1 and 107). The r e a d e r of t h e Cours, a t l e a s t u n t i l t h e
appearance of Godel's Sources manuserites i n 1957, c o u l d n o t have known
t h a t S a u s s u r e ' s claim, t h a t t h e f o r c e of t h e s i g n s was i n t h e f a c t t h a t
t h e y were independent of t h e reazia t h e y s i g n i f i e d ( c f . 1894: 13a) , d i d
not t r u l y r e f l e c t h i s views c o n c e r n i n g t h e arbitraire p u t forward when
t e a c h i n g g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c problems ( l g O 7 - l l ) , and, a s a r e s u l t , t h i s
19
h a s i n v i t e d undue a t t a c k s a g a i n s t t h e p r i n c i p l e of t h e arbitra<re.
As t h e c r i t i c a l e d i t i o n r e v e a l s ( c f . CLG(E), 155 and 1 6 2 ) , B a l l y and
Sechehaye, i n a s e r i o u s misunderstanding of S a u s s u r e ' s i n t e n t i o n s , made
u s e of h i s one-time s t a t e m e n t t h a t language and ( i t s d e r i v a t i v e ) w r i t i n g
"ne s o n t PAS FOND& < s u r un r a p p o r t naturez des choses > ." (1894: 1 8 ) .
We b e l i e v e t h a t t h e above c l a i m by S a u s s u r e i s n o t u t t e r l y f a l s e ;
i t s u r e l y h e l p s t o s e p a r a t e human speech from o t h e r i n s t i t u t i o n s and
s e m i o l o g i c a l systems i n which a rapport natrneZ may n o t o n l y u n d e r l i e
t h e p a r t i c u l a r code b u t i n f a c t i s g e n e r a l l y t h e b e s t s u p p o r t of i t s
o p e r a t i o n , a s Saussure h i m s e l f s u g g e s t e d (1894:17). However, t h e i n s e r -
t i o n of t h i s i d e a i n t o q u i t e a d i f f e r e n t k i n d of argument, namely t h a t
of ( s t r u c t u r a l ) m o t i v a t i o n , could o n l y l e a d t o c o n t r a d i c t i o n s . That
t h e e d i t o r s d i d n o t understand t h e Saussurean concept of t h e arbitraire
i s e v i d e n t from a t l e a s t two m i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s of h i s i d e a s . Firstly,
t h e y thought i t n e c e s s a r y t o draw t h e f i g u r e of a t r e e ( s . CLG, 99)
where i n t h e o r i g i n a l "concept" was w r i t t e n , adding a t e x t u a l d e s c r i p t i o n
20
which d i s t o r t s what t h e s t u d e n t s ' n o t e s a c t u a l l y s a y ( c f . CLG(E), 1 5 0 ) .
Secondly, i n a j o i n t s t a t e m e n t d r a f t e d by Sechehaye and c o u n t e r s i g n e d
by B a l l y and H. F r e i i n r e p l y t o c r i t i c i s m s of t h e arbitraire by s c h o l a r s
of d i f f e r e n t p e r s u a s i o n s i n t h e l a t e 1930s, t h e misunderstanding was
compounded by unwarranted r e f e r e n c e t o t h e t r a d i t i o n a l p h y ' s e i / t h 6 s e i
dichotomy.21 It i s s i g n i f i c a n t t o n o t e t h a t although subsequently t h e
members of t h e "Geneva School" devoted much a t t e n t i o n t o S a u s s u r e ' s
concept of t h e language s i g n and i t s v a r i o u s i m p l i c a t i o n s , b o t h t h e o r e -
t i c a l and p r a c t i c a l , 2 2 t h e y f a i l e d , even a f t e r p u b l i c a t i o n of Godel's
Sources manuscrites i n 1957, t o produce a s e r i o u s a t t e m p t t o r e - e s t a b l i s h
S a u s s u r e ' s views concerning t h e a r b i t m i r e . 23 We s u s p e c t t h a t t h e main
r e a s o n f o r t h i s l a c u n a i s t o b e found i n t h e n a t u r e of Godel's book
i t s e l f , a s t u d y f i l l e d w i t h q u o t a t i o n s from v a r i o u s s o u r c e s (many of
them s t i l l u n p u b l i s h e d ) , i n t e r e s t i n g o b s e r v a t i o n s and, a t t i m e s , pene-
t r a t i n g i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s , which however makes d i f f i c u l t r e a d i n g , p a r t l y
b e c a u s e i t i s b a d l y o r g a n i z e d and p a r t l y b e c a u s e i t h a s no i n d e x . Signi-
f i c a n t l y , w h i l e Godel d e v o t e s a s e p a r a t e c h a p t e r t o t h e q u e s t i o n of t h e
ZinZkrit6 (du s i g n i f i z ) ( c f . SM, 203-7), h e d i s c u s s e s t h e problem of
a r b i t r a i r e o n l y en passant ( s . SM, 194-6, and 242-3), 24 s p e n d i n g a l m o s t
more s p a c e on Whitney's views t h a n on t h o s e of Saussure.
It i s t h e r e f o r e n o t s u r p r i s i n g t h a t l i n g u i s t s d i s c u s s i n g t h i s
25
Saussurean p r i n c i p l e c o n t i n u e d t o r e f e r e x c l u s i v e l y t o t h e Cours,
u n t i l t h e most comprehensive, d e t a i l e d and a u t h o r i t a t i v e s t u d y by R.
Engler appeared i n 1963. 26 Indeed Engler h a s devoted much a t t e n t i o n
t o t h e problem of t h e language s i g n and, i n p a r t i c u l a r , t o i t s a r b i t r a r y
nature. This i n t e r e s t i n re-es t a b l i s h i n g S a u s s u r e 's o r i g i n a l t h o u g h t i s
f a i r l y e v i d e n t from E n g l e r ' s f i r s t paper i n which h e c o n f r o n t s t h e t e x t
of t h e Cours w i t h i t s s o u r c e s ( s . E n g l e r , 1959: 127-32) t r y i n g t o sub-
s t a n t i a t e t h e c l a i m s of t h o s e s c h o l a r s who had defended S a u s s u r e ' s
concept of t h e a r b i t r a i r e ; Engler 's most r e c e n t paper touches upon
q u e s t i o n s of S a u s s u r e ' s s e m i o l o g i c a l t h e o r y and i t s r e l a t i o n t o s o c i o l o g y
and psychology ( s . E n g l e r , 1970:63-5). H i s major s t u d y on t h e a r b i t r a i r e
of some s e v e n t y pages a l t o g e t h e r (Engler, 1962 and 1964) however, though
c e r t a i n l y t h e most p e n e t r a t i n g work on t h i s c r u c i a l a s p e c t of S a u s s u r e ' s
27
theory t o d a t e , has n o t y e t received t h e a t t e n t i o n i t deserves.
According t o Engler (1962:7) i t s t i l l appears a s though t h e Coms h a s
been n e i t h e r w e l l r e a d nor w e l l u n d e r s t o o d , and a major p o r t i o n of h i s
e f f o r t s a r e devoted t o e s t a b l i s h i n g t h e p l a c e of t h e a r b i t r a i r e w i t h i n
S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r y making u s e of t h e c r i t i c a l e d i t i o n and t h e s o u r c e s of t h e
pub l i s h e d Cours.
 Engler p o i n t s o u t t h a t t h e c o n c e p t of t h e a r b i t r a i r e i s d i s c u s s e d
on v a r i o u s o c c a s i o n s i n t h e Cours, and i n d i f f e r e n t c o n t e x t s . Indeed,
t h e n o t i o n i s f i r s t i n c l u d e d i n t h e d e f i n i t i o n of Zangue (CLG, 26) i n ' t h e
I n t r o d u c t i o n ; secondly, i t i s termed t h e "premier p r i n c i p e " i n P a r t I
of t h e C o w s o u t l i n i n g t h e g e n e r a l p r i n c i p l e s of l i n g u i s t i c s (CLG, 100-102);
i t a l s o a p p e a r s i n t h e c h a p t e r s devoted t o t h e i m m u t a b i l i t y (CLG, 104f.
and 1 0 6 f . ) and m u t a b i l i t y ( l l o f . , 1 1 2 f . ) of t h e s i g n and a s a n i m p o r t a n t
component of s e m i o l o g i c a l t h e o r y (116); t h i r d l y , t h e a r b i t r a i r e f i g u r e s
i n prominent p l a c e s i n P a r t I1 devoted t o synchronic l i n g u i s t i c s ( s .
CLG, 157, 163, 1 6 5 f . ) , i n p a r t i c u l a r i n t h e c h a p t e r d e a l i n g w i t h t h e
q u e s t i o n of m o t i v a t i o n (180-84); f o u r t h l y , and t h i s f a c t cannot b e s u f f i -
c i e n t l y s t r e s s e d , t h e concept p l a y s a s i g n i f i c a n t r 6 l e i n P a r t I11 which
t r e a t s problems of h i s t o r i c a l l i n g u i s t i c s , where i t i s a s s e r t e d t h a t
1 ) t h e a r b i t r a r i n e s s of t h e s i g n i s t h e r e a s o n why p h o n e t i c changes a r e
u n l i m i t e d (CLG, 208), 2) p h o n e t i c change and analogy c o u n t e r b a l a n c e
each o t h e r owing t o t h e a b s o l u t e a r b i t r a r i n e s s of p h o n e t i c change and
t h e ( r e l a t i v e ) m o t i v a t i o n of analogy (221), and 3) t h e d i s t i n c t i o n
between p r o d u c t i v e and u n p r o d u c t i v e words and t h e f o r m a t i o n of new elements
a c c o r d i n g t o t h e c a l c u l u s of t h e f o u r t h p r o p o r t i o n a l confirm t h e d i s -
28
t i n c t i o n between a r b i t r a i r e absoZu and a r b i t r a i r e r e Z a t i f (228-30).
Engler (1962:lOf.) q u o t e s a number of r e l e v a n t passages t o d e m o n s t r a t e
t h e a p p a r e n t d i f f i c u l t y of c l e a r i n g up a l l t h e problems s u r r o u n d i n g t h i s
i m p o r t a n t p r i n c i p l e which, a s h e demonstrates i n h i s subsequent a n a l y s i s
of w r i t i n g s on t h i s t o p i c between 1916 and 1962 ( s . Engler, 1962:12-40,
1964 [ p a s s i m ] ) , have a r o u s e d c o n t r o v e r s y and misunderstanding. His
a n a l y s i s of t h e s o u r c e s of t h e Cours once a g a i n shows t h a t t h e work of t h e
e d i t o r s must b e c r i t i c i z e d . Not o n l y have they f a i l e d t o account f o r
t h e f a c t t h a t S a u s s u r e ' s i d e a s evolved c o n s i d e r a b l y - his statements
on t h e s e m i o l o g i c a l n a t u r e of language cover a p e r i o d of twenty y e a r s
(1891-1911; s . Engler, l962:42f .) - b u t a l s o they ventured t o give
t h e i r own (not always v e r y c l e a r ) views wherever t h e y f e l t t h a t t h e
s o u r c e s d i d n o t s u f f i c i e n t l y d e m o n s t r a t e a given p o i n t ( c f . CLG(E), 301
toll. 6 ) ; t h i s i s something t h e c r i t i c a l e d i t i o n r e v e a l s . 29 /
 E n g l e r ' s subsequent i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h e v a r i o u s a s p e c t s of t h e
m b i t r a i r e w i t h i n S a u s s u r e ' s t h e b r i e s (1962:41ff.) demonstrates t h e impor-
t a n c e of t h i s concept. I n h i s l a s t c o u r s e of 1910/11 S a u s s u r e . r e f e r s
t o it i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h t h r e e v i t a l components of h i s t h e o r y of language:
1) semiology, 2) t h e s y n c h r o n i c mechanism, and 3) t h e ( d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g
p r i n c i p l e o f ) value. Engler p o i n t s o u t t h a t t h e s e t h r e e a s p e c t s of t h e
a r b i t r a i r e permit t h e f o l l o w i n g c l a s s i f i c a t i o n : 1 ) t h e synchronic
mechanism of m o t i v a t i o n l i m i t s t h e p r i n c i p l e of t h e a r b i t r a i r e ; 2) t h e
same p r i n c i p l e a c c o u n t s f o r t h e c o n t r a s t i n g o p e r a t i o n s of p h o n e t i c change
and analogy, and, a s a l o g i c a l c o n c l u s i o n from 1 ) and 2 ) , t h e a r b i t r a i r e
r e v e a l s i t s e l f as 3 ) a panchronic and s e m i o l o g i c a l p r i n c i p l e ( c f . E n g l e r ,
1962: 4 1 ) .
These few o b s e r v a t i o n s a b o u t S a u s s u r e ' s concept of t h e m b i t r a i r e ,
and we have by no means d i s c u s s e d a l l of i t s i m p l i c a t i o n s , s u g g e s t t h a t ,
though i t i s n o t t h e first p r i n c i p l e of S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r y (something
t h a t c e r t a i n s c h o l a r s have tended t o a r g u e ) , i t c e r t a i n l y r e p r e s e n t s
one of i t s c r u c i a l elements. R e c e n t l y Engler h a s made an e x p l i c i t s t a t e -
ment (summarizing what h e was t r y i n g t o show i n h i s s t u d y of 1962)
a c c o r d i n g t o which one h a s t o reckon w i t h two d i s t i n c t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s
of t h e a r b i t r a i r e , n o t t o s p e a k of S a u s s u r e ' s e a r l i e r m i s l e a d i n g views
relating the sign t o the thing it signifies. The impact of t h i s argument
may w e l l b e much more momentous t h a n De Mauro (1969:115-9) for instance
seems t o imply. Following E n g l e r ' s s t a t e m e n t of 1970, two c o n c e p t s h a v e
t o b e distinguished: 1 ) t h e s e m i o l o g i c a l model w i t h i n which t h e r e l a t i o n
between t h e s i g n i f i a n t and t h e s i g n i f i z i s a r b i t r a r y , and 2) w i t h i n t h e
model of a g i v e n language ( s e e n from t h e s y n c h r o n i c p o i n t of view) a
tendency t o minimize t h e a r b i t r a r i n e s s of t h e l i e n i n f a v o u r of a n
a r b i t r a i r e du s i g n i f i a n t ( s . VR 29:131). These o b s e r v a t i o n s a l s o s u g g e s t
t h a t t h e procedure of t r e a t i n g p a r t i c u l a r i n g r e d i e n t s of S a u s s u r e t e a c h i n g s
i n i s o l a t i o n , o u t s i d e t h e t h e o r e t i c a l " c o n t e x t of s i t u a t i o n " so to
s p e a k , l e a d s more e a s i l y t o c o n f u s i o n t h a n t o a n e l u c i d a t i o n of S a u s s u r e ' s
o r i g i n a l thought. Indeed, i t a p p e a r s t h a t i n t h e f i n a l a n a l y s i s , t h e
problems which S a u s s u r e h a s been f a c e d w i t h have t h e i r s o u r c e i n S a u q s u r e ' s
concept of langue ( c f . 2.2.2.2) and h i s concern over making l i n g u i s t i c s
a n autonomous s c i e n c e .
 Once i t h a s b e e n r e c o g n i z e d t h a t S a u s s u r e s u g g e s t e d a s c i e n c e which
i s a theory of s i g n s , i.e. semiokogy, i n which language p l a y s a p a r t i c u l a r
rGle, o t h e r a s p e c t s of S a u s s u r e ' s argument w i l l s u r e l y become much more
clear t h a n t h e y have p r e v i o u s l y appeared t o most r e a d e r s of t h e Cows.
To go i n t o t h i s f u r t h e r would r e q u i r e a l o n g e r s t u d y devoted t o t h e
r e - i n t e r p r e t a t i o n and r e - o r d e r i n g of S a u s s u r e ' s t h o u g h t s , a work which
would h a v e t o a n a l y z e a l a r g e amount of S a u s s u r e ' s s t i l l unpublished
p a p e r s , i n p a r t i c u l a r t h o s e d e a l i n g w i t h p h o n e t i c s w i t h a view t o e s t a b -
l i s h i n g uazews s ~ n r i o l o g i q u e s ( c f . SW I, 743ff .) and e s p e c i a l l y t h o s e
p e r t a i n i n g t o anagrams .30
E n g l e r ' s a n a l y s e s c e r t a i n l y c o n s t i t u t e a p r a i s e w o r t h y e f f o r t t o work
i n t h i s d i r e c t i o n ; h i s p r e p a r a t i o n of t h e c r i t i c a l e d i t i o n of t h e Coups
h a s provided him w i t h i n s i g h t s i n t o S a u s s u r e ' s d o c t r i n e no one e l s e
could c l a i m t o p o s s e s s ; u n t i l t h e i n d e x t o t h i s work a p p e a r s t h e Lexique
de Za t e r m i n o l o g i e s a u s s u r i e n n e c a n b e used w i t h e q u a l l y s a t i s f y i n g
results. However, E n g l e r ' s u n t i r i n g work on c l a r i f y i n g S a u s s u r e ' s o r i g i n a l
thought by f o l l o w i n g Sechehaye's a d v i c e t h a t " l a v r a i e c r i t i q u e du C o w s
consiste 2 c o l l a b o r e r a v e c s o n a u t e u r " (VR 5 : 3 ) , and a number of E n g l e r ' s
31
c r i t i q u e s of post-Saussurean w r i t i n g s by h i s f e l l o w - l i n g u i s t s , cannot
p r e v e n t t h e s e r i o u s s t u d e n t of l i n g u i s t i c s a s a s c i e n c e from coming t o
terms w i t h S a u s s u r e ' s many s u g g e s t i o n s , a l a r g e number of which, more t h a n
h a l f a c e n t u r y a f t e r t h e p u b l i c a t i o n of t h e C o w s , s t i l l a w a i t a r e -
e v a l u a t i o n and, what i s more i m p o r t a n t , e x p l o i t a t i o n and f u r t h e r development.
The d i s c u s s i o n i n t h e p r e s e n t c h a p t e r concerning a number of c o n c e p t s
s u r r o u n d i n g S a u s s u r e ' s i d e a s about t h e s e m i o l o g i c a l n a t u r e of language
cannot c l a i m t o b e complete. The Lexique of t h e terms S a u s s u r e e i t h e r d i d
i n t r o d u c e t o l i n g u i s t i c s o r r e d e f i n e d f o r h i s p a r t i c u l a r purpose c o n t a i n s
i n t e r e s t i n g i n f o r m a t i o n about t h e l i n g u i s t i c s i g n , f o r example, which high-
l i g h t t h e n e c e s s i t y f o r a reworking of b a s i c p r i n c i p l e s of S a u s s u r e ' s
doctrine.32 ~ i n k l a r l ~S a, u s s u r e ' s d i s t i n c t i o n between s i g n i f i c a t i o n
and uaZeur ( c f . LTS, 46 and 5 2 f . ) , which A . Burger e x e m p l i f i e d w i t h
r e g a r d to. t h e French v e r b a l s u f f i x "-e" i n h i s paper of 1 9 6 1 , ~h~a s
34
n o t b e e n t a k e n up a s a v a l u a b l e component f o r a t h e o r y of s e m a n t i c s ,
I
and s u r e l y d e s e r v e s f u r t h e r assessment. S a u s s u r e ' s g e n i u s produced
I

indeed a v a r i e t y of i d e a s , and t h o s e on t h e s i g n n a t u r e of language may

w e l l prove t o b e t h e most i m p o r t a n t of h i s s u g g e s t i o n s . The c r e a t i o n of
t h e semiology h e envisaged, a s c i e n c e w i t h i n which l i n g u i s t i c s c o u l d
t a k e p r i d e of p l a c e , and h i s i n d i r e c t p r o p o s a l s on how t h e problem of
semantics i n l i n g u i s t i c d e s c r i p t i o n could possibly b e solved (cf. h i s
concept of v a l e n c e ) , c o n s t i t u t e a c h a l l e n g e t o t h e s c h o l a r who h a s r e a l i z e d
t h a t l i n g u i s t i c s can become a mature s c i e n c e o n l y i f t h e o r y i s p l a c e d
o v e r and above a l l t h e o t h e r a c t i v i t i e s devoted t o t h e s t u d y of language.
It w i l l b e t h e purpose of t h e n e x t c h a p t e r t o i n v e s t i g a t e t o what d e g r e e
l i n g u i s t s h a v e met t h e s e r e q u i r e m e n t s .
 I

FOOTNOTES - 2.2.3.2

FdS r e f e r r e d h i m s e l f t o " l e ~ s y s t ~ md e M. C u r t i u s " (RecueiL 4 ) ,

"le systzme d e S c h l e i c h e r " ( i b i d . , 5 ) , " l e systsme d 'Amelung" (p. 1 1 0 ) ,
etc. i n t h e r a t h e r u n s o p h i s t i c a t e d s e n s e of t h e t e r m , a term which f i g u r e d
i n t h e t i t l e of Bopp's epoch-making s t u d y of 1816,

For a f i n e a n a l y s i s of FdS's achievement i n h i s Mzmoire, s.

Hjelmslev, 1970: 123-7.

Cf. FdS's i n t r o d u c t i o n of c o e f f i c i e n t s o n a n t i q u e (RecueiZ, 9 f . ,

47, 118, and 127) and of & r o ( i b i d . , . 1 8 2 , and 2 0 3 [ b i s ] ) .

Cf. FdS's replacement of t h e S a n s k r i t term "gouna" (which h e used

w i t h q u o t a t i o n marks, s. RecueiZ, 118 [ b i s ] ) by a Z t e r n a n c e (RecueiZ,
1 3 , 49 [ b i s ] , 204, and 207); c f . a l s o i b i d . , 209, 223, and e l s e w h e r e f o r
d e r i v a t i v e s of t h i s term. We g i v e t h e s e l o c a t i o n s s i n c e SM and LTS a r e
i n c o m p l e t e and, a t t i m e s , i n c o r r e c t on t h i s m a t t e r .

LTS, 37 ( ' o p p o s i t i o n ' ) r e f e r s t o a p a s s a g e of an a r t i c l e which

FdS w r o t e i n 1877 ( s . RecueiZ, 381) i n which h e s t a t e d t h a t a and o
i n t h e c l a s s i c languages p r e c e d i n g l i q u i d s may b e forming t o g e t h e r
11
un groupe oppos6 2 e". Where t h e term terme i s concerned, LTS, 50
c i t e s a p h r a s e from a paper d r a f t e d i n t h e same y e a r i n which FdS spoke
of "terme [ n o t t e r m e s ] d e l l a l t & a t i o n " (RecueiZ, 3 7 2 ) . The term d i s t i n c t
i s b a r e l y h i n t e d a t i n t h e LTS, 20 a l t h o u g h i t d e s e r v e s a t t e n t i o n ( c f .
RecueiZ, 114 f o r a l o c a t i o n ) .

The o n l y p a s s a g e s we a r e aware of i n which FdS makes a t e n t a t i v e

d i s t i n c t i o n between s o n and phonzme a r e pp. 115 and 240 of t h e RecueiZ.

FdS employed t h e term phonzme ( i n v e n t e d by A . Dufriche-Desgenettes

i n 1873; c f . SM, 160) much more f r e q u e n t l y i n h i s ~ Z m o i r et h a n "une
v i n g t a i n e d e f o i s " (Godel, Zoc. c i t .) .
Godel (SM, 28Of .) and Engler (LTS, 52f .) i g n o r e t h e s e i n s t a n c e s .

The m a n u s c r i p t of t h i s e a r l y a t t e m p t ( r e p u t e d l y l o s t ; c f . Godel,
CFS 17:13) h a s been r e c o v e r e d and r e c e n t l y been donated by Raymond and
Jacques d e S a u s s u r e t o t h e Houghton L i b r a r y of Harvard U n i v e r s i t y , c f .
R. Jakobson, SW I, 743f.(1971).
 lo FdS's u s e of vaZeur i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h a phoneme i n o p p o s i t i o n
w i t h o t h e r phonemes "dans un s y s t s m e ferm6 [ s i c ] " and h i s a f f i r m a t i o n
(made i n t h e t h i r d course) t h a t t h e syntagm i s composed of " u n i t & s i g n i -
f i c a t i v e ~ "( c f . SM, 167) may a l s o u n d e r s c o r e t h i s impression.

l1 Cf. t h e f i r s t t e n t a t i v e a n a l y s i s of some of FdS's t h e o r i e s of t h e

phoneme probably developed i n t h e mid-1890s from m a n u s c r i p t s which Raymond
and J a c q u e s d e S a u s s u r e have r e c e n t l y donated t o t h e Houghton L i b r a r y of
Harvard U n i v e r s i t y , "Saussure's Unpublished R e f l e c t i o n s on Phonemes"
by R. Jakobson t o appear i n CFS 26 (1971) and r e p r . i n SW I, 2nd e n l .
ed., 1971, 743-50, esp. 7 4 7 f f .

l2 Cf. FdS's l e c t u r e s on morphology d a t i n g back t o t h e academic

y e a r 1894195 which have been ed. by R. Godel i n Geneva SchooZ Reader,
26-38.

l3Cf. A . Sechehaye's a r t i c l e on t h i s m a t t e r , ' b e l a d h f i n i t i o n du

~ h o n s m ea' l a d h f i n i t i o n d e l ' e n t i t h d e langue", CFS 2:45-55 (1942);
r e p r . i n Geneva SchooZ Reader, 182-90.

l4 FdS: "Simple exemple: fit : fiti; l e s i g n e du p l u r i e l e s t i.

Coup d'hchec, < donc n o u v e l l e p o s i t i o n d e s termes: > f o t : f o e t ; l e
s i g n e du p l u r i e l e s t < n a i n t e n a n t 1' > o p p o s i t i o n o : o e (qu'on l e
.
v e u i l l e ou non) I ' (1894: 9 a ? ) . For a n e a r l y u s e of ' s i g n ' i n t h i s s e n s e ,
c f . F. Bopp, %her d a s Demonstrativpronomen und den Ursprung d e r Casuszei-
chenl', A(P)AWB of 1-826, pp. 8 5 f f .

l5 T h i s o b s e r v a t i o n i s underscored by FdS's s t a t e m e n t f o l l o w i n g t h e
comparison between language and c h e s s t h a t each p o s i t i o n of t h e c h e s s
game 1I comporte une d e s c r i p t i o n e t une a p p r e c i a t i o n math'ematique" (1894:
9a; { b i d . , 1 6 , and 22; SM, 44). Cf. a l s o FdS's dictum of roughly t h e
same period: "L'expression s i m p l e s e r a a l g g b r i q u e ou e l l e n e s e r a pas ."
(SM, 49).

l6For a more ample documentation of FdS's i d e a s concerning semiology,

s. CLG(E), 45-52, 153-4, 162-4, and 169-71.

l7 I t would b e i n t e r e s t i n g t o know whether FdS was f a m i l i a r w i t h

Rudolf K l e i n p a u l ' s (1845-1918) Sprache ohne Worte: I d e e e i n e r aZZgemeinen
Wissenschaft d e r Sprache (Leipzig: W. F r i e d r i c h , 1 8 8 8 ) , a work i n which
a number of o b s e r v a t i o n s have been made which p e r t a i n t o s e m i o l o g i c a l
theory.
\

l8 FdS adds a f u r t h e r argument " e n t r e parentheses": Somebody who

does n o t s p e a k h a s n e v e r t h e l e s s " t o u t l e s y s t s m e d e v a l e u r s en l u i "
(CFS 15:31; c f . CLG, 3 1 ) .

l9 The most prominent of t h e s e c r i t i c i s m s of PdS's a r b i t r a i r e

h a s been E. B e n v e n i s t e ' s p a p e r , "Nature du s i g n e l i n g u i s t i q u e " , AL
' 1:23-9 (1939), which h a s been f r e q u e n t l y r e p r i n t e d d u r i n g t h e l a s t
- ., few y e a r s ; e.g. B e n v e n i s t e , 1966:49-55; RiL 11, 104-8 (1966); Rey,
1970:97-102, and, i n Russ. t r a n s l . , i n Zvegincev, 1964:459-64.
 20 The t e x t t h e e d i t o r s made up i s q u i t e r e v e a l i n g . Where S a u s s u r e
had spoken of a "rapprochement de termes", i . e . t h e s i g n i f i z and t h e
s i g n i f i a n t , t h e CLG reads: "Que nous cherchions l e s e n s du mot l a t i n
a r b o r ou l e mot p a r l e q u e l l e l a t i n dgsigne l e concept "arbre", il est
c l a i r que s e u l s l e s rapprochements consacr6s p a r l a l a n g u e nous a p p a r a i s -
s e n t conformes 3 l a r g a l i t 6 [ s i c . ] " (CLG, 9 9 ) . FdS d i d n o t s p e a k of
r e a l i t y a t a l l i n t h i s c o n t e x t (cf. CLG(E), 150). On a n o t h e r o c c a s i o n
i n which t h e s t u d e n t s ' n o t e s r e p o r t e d t h a t FdS had argued t h a t v a l u e s
remain r e l a t i v e because t h e c o n n e c t i o n between t h e two components of a
s i g n i s a r b i t r a r y , t h e e d i t o r s changed t h e s t a t e m e n t t o r e a d a s f o l l o w s :
"Mais en f a i t , l e s v a l e u r s r e s t e n t e n t i s r e m e n t r e l a t i v e s , e t v o i l a pourquoi
l e l i e n d e l ' i d g e e t du son e s t r a d i c a l e m e n t a r b i t r a i r e . " (CLG, 157; o u r
i t a l i c s ; c f . CLG(E), 254).

21 See Sechehaye, e t a l . , 11Sur l ' a r b i t r a i r e du signe", AL 2:165-9

(l94O/4l) ; r e p r . i n Geneva SchooZ Reader, 191-5 ( l 9 6 9 ) , a t p. 192.

22 Cf. t h e f o l l o w i n g l o c a t i o n s of a r t i c l e s by B a l l y , J P s 36:161-74
(1939); BSLP 41: 75-88 (1940) ; r e p r . LGLF, 127-39; FM 8:173-206; LGLF
341-62 and 160-64; Sechehaye, AL 2: 165-9 ( l 9 4 0 / 4 1 ) , and CFS 2: 45-55
(1942); H. F r e i , CFS 2: 15-27 (1942) ; ZPhon 4: 161-91; E. S o l l b e r g e r ,
CFS f f : 45-6, and Godel, ibid., 31-41 (1953). Many of t h e s e p a p e r s h a v e
been r e p r . i n Geneva SchooZ R e a d e r , 87-100, 182-90, 191-5, 331-40, and
357-9.

23 Cf. t h e polemics between H. F r e i and E. Buyssens on t h e language

s i g n i n Lingua 11:128-40 ( F r e i ) ; Lingua 12: 66-8 (Buyssens) , and 423-8
( F r e i ) of 1962-63. This a p p l i e s t o Godel himself who v i s i b l y a v o i d s
t h e q u e s t i o n of t h e a r b i t r a i r e ; c f . h i s paper, "De l a t h g o r i e du s i g n e
aux termes du syst$me", CFS 22: 53-68 (1966) ; r e p r . i n Geneva SchooZ
Reader, 341-56.

24 Godel (SM, 194, n . 218) r e f e r s t o N . Ege's p a p e r , " ~ sei g n e e s t

a r b i t r a i r e " , TCLC 5 : l l - 2 9 (1949), a s " 1 1 i n t e r p r 6 t a t i o n c o r r e c t e du mot
arbitraire".

25 Cf. G . C. Lepschy, "Ancora s u 1' ' a r b i t r a i r e du signe"', ASNP

31:65-102 (1962), and t h e n o t e s by P. Naert i n Word 23:422-7 (1967[1969]),
and P. R. ~ g o ni n SL 22:33-5 (1968), b u t a l s o P. Micl$u, 1970:85ff. and
2 0 7 f f . , who n o t e s t h e e x i s t e n c e of t h e CLG(E) and l i s t s t h e SM i n t h e
b i b l i o g r a p h y only t o a f f i r m : "Le Cours de Saussure c o n t i e n t donc t o u t e s
l e s donnges n g c e s s a i r e s p e r m e t t a n t de poser l e problsme [ d e 1' a r b i t r a i r e ]
en d e s termes c o r r e c t s . " (Micl&, 1970: 8 6 ) .

26 Engler, "Thgorie e t c r i t i q u e d 'un p r i n c i p e s a u s s u r i e n : 1' a r b i -

t r a i r e du s i g n e l ' , CFS 19:5-66 (1962[1963]); idem, " ~ o m ~ l 6 m e n t2s 1'
a r b i t r a i r e " , CFS 21: 25-32 ( l 9 6 3 [ 1 9 6 4 ] ) .

27 Exceptions t o t h i s g e n e r a l t r e n d , f o r i n s t a n c e t h e works by
D e r o s s i (1965) and De Mauro ( l 9 6 9 [ 1 9 6 5 ] ) , w i l l b e d e a l t w i t h i n t h e n e x t
chap. (2.2.3.3).
 2'8 Cf. t h e t a b l e e s t a b l i s h e d i n Engler, 1962:8-9 which g i v e s v i s u a l
s u p p o r t t o t h e many c o n t e x t s i n which t h e a r b i t r a i r e o c c u r s ; t h e i n d e x
of CLG, 319 does n o t g i v e a c l e a r p i c t u r e of t h i s f a c t .

29 S. CLG(E), 34, 152-7, 158-60, 162, 167-70, 173, 178, 254-5,

265, 269-70, 297-303, 344, 365, 379-83 ( r e f . n o t g i v e n by Engler) where
t h e e d i t o r s added t h e i r own i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o r used t h e s o u r c e s m i s l e a d i n g l y ,
i n p a r t i c u l a r on pp. 155, 162, 178, 254, 301, 365 ( ? ) , and 379 of CLG(E).

30 Cf. t h e e x c e r p t s which J. S t a r o b i n s k i h a s r e c e n t l y e d i t e d and

p u b l i s h e d i n Mercure d e F r a n c e 350: 243-62 (Febr. 1964) ; To Honor Roman
Jakobson 111, 1906-17 (1967); Change 6:91-117 ( P a r i s : Ed. du S e u i l , 1970),
.
and elsewhere. For complete r e f . , s Bib Ziographia Saussureana, 1870-
1970, Nos. 120, 121, 129, 132, and 134, b u t a l s o No. 126 c o n s i s t i n g of
a p r e s e n t a t i o n by A. R o s s i of 1968.
31
Cf. t h e reviews by Engler of t h e f o l l o w i n g books: 1 ) D e r o s s i ,
1965 i n CFS 24:94-8 (1968); 2 ) De Mauro, 1969 i n BCILA 11:79-80 (l97O),
and 3) D e Mauro, 1968 i n IrR 29 :123-31 (1970) .
32
LTS, 45-6 r e v e a l t h a t FdS used ' s i g n e ' i n a t l e a s t t h r e e d i f f e r e n t
s e n s e s : 1 ) s i g n i n t h e c o n v e n t i o n a l non-vocal and n o n - l i n g u i s t i c s e n s e ;
2) s i g n i n t h e s e n s e of image a c o u s t i q u e o r s i g n i f i a n t ( e . g. [ s i g n e ]
z&o, g r a p h i c s i g n , v o c a l s i g n , e t c . ) - c f . CLG, 26, 28, 33, 163, 164,
166, and e l s e w h e r e -, and 3) ( a r b i t r a r y ) a s s o c i a t i o n of a s i g n i f i a n t
with a s i g n i f i k .
33 S . CFS 18: 5-15 (1961), repr. i n Geneva SchooZ Reader, 232-43.

34 T h i s d i s t i n c t i o n i s s t r i k i n g l y a b s e n t from A.-J. Greirnas' Skinan-

t i q u e s t r u c t w l a Z e which i s v e r y much i n d e b t e d t o FdS 's s u g g e s t i o n s and
i n which t h e a u t h o r d i s t i n g u i s h e s between a s e m i o l o g i c a l and a semantic
.
l e v e l i n language ( s Greimas , 1966: 103) .
2.2.3.3 Post-Saussurean Developments i n S e m i o l o g i c a l Theory

Psycho Zogues, phi Zosophes e t Zinguistes

s 'accordent pour reconna?tre Z 'importance
du signe. L'importance du signe e s t de-
venue plus grande encore apre's Za dGcou-
uerte, ZtabZie par F . de Saussure e t ap-
profondie par Za Zinguistique de nos jours,
du caractBre 5 Za fois purement f ormel ( e t
par conszquent m b i t r a i r e , conventionne Zl
e t b i l a t g r a l du signe Zinguistique.
Louis Hjelmslev i n 1950 (JPs 47: 54)

On a tant 6 c r i t sur Ze signe Zinguistique

quriZ e s t d i f f i c i Z e h Z'heure actueZZe de
prGciser exactement 02 en e s t Ze prob ZBme.
Crest pourquoi i Z e s t important d 'envisa-
ger de's Ze dzbut Za pZace du signe duns
ZrensembZe des f a i t s de Zangue ... .
P a u l ~ i c l z u(19 70 :v i )

No o t h e r a s p e c t of S a u s s u r e ' s l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y h a s r e c e i v e d s o
much a t t e n t i o n i n t h e l i t e r a t u r e a s t h a t of t h e l i n g u i s t i c s i g n . This
may n o t b e a s u r p r i s i n g f a c t , i f one c o n s i d e r s t h a t every l i n g u i s t must
d e c i d e what element h e w i l l t r e a t a s t h e b a s i c u n i t of a n a l y s i s p r i o r
t o h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n o r , i n c a s e s where t h e language h a s n o t y e t b e e n
d e s c r i b e d , soon a f t e r t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c e n t i t i e s of t h e language under
i n v e s t i g a t i o n have been i d e n t i f i e d . However, t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between
d e s c r i p t i o n and o t h e r t e c h n i c a l p r o c e d u r e s of a n a l y s i s and s t a t e m e n t s
of t h e o r y i s perhaps n o t as e a s y t o p e r c e i v e a s i t a p p e a r s t o t h o s e
somewhat removed from t h e a c t u a l c o l l e c t i o n , o r d e r i n g , and ( t e n t a t i v e )
assessment of t h e d a t a , and many s c h o l a r s have been s a t i s f i e d w i t h a
s e t of p r o c e d u r a l p r i n c i p l e s and h a v e n o t v e n t u r e d beyond a n approved
methodology (which they o f t e n have b e e n tempted t o m i s t a k e f o r t h e o r y ) .
D e s p i t e t h e a p p a r e n t p r e d i l e c t i o n f o r d e s c r i p t i v e problems i t i s none
t h e l e s s s u r p r i s i n g t o n o t e t h a t a r e c e n t b i b l i o g r a p h i c a l a c c o u n t of
p u b l i c a t i o n s between 1916 and 1970 on t h e t o p i c of t h e language s i g n
11
r e p o r t e d some f i v e hundred i t e m s .
Our a s t o n i s h m e n t i s f u r t h e r i n c r e a s e d s i n c e a c l o s e r a n a l y s i s
of t h e m a t e r i a l r e v e a l s roughly t h e f o l l o w i n g p i c t u r e : 1 ) The m a j o r i t y
of t h e w r i t e r s make ( e x p l i c i t o r i n d i r e c t ) r e f e r e n c e t o S a u s s u r e b u t even
t h e most r e c e n t works i g n o r e almost e x c l u s i v e l y t h e p e r t i n e n t i n f o r m a t i o n
provided i n Godel's Sources manuscrites (1957) and t h e v a r i o u s p u b l i c a t i o n s
by Engler (1959ff .); 2) except f o r t h e w r i t i n g s of Engler h i m s e l f t h e r e
a p p e a r s t o b e o n l y D e r o s s i ' s s t u d y of 1965 which h a s a t t e m p t e d t o i n t e r -
p r e t S a u s s u r e ' s s i g n t h e o r y i n t h e l i g h t of h i s t h e o r y of l a n g u a g e a s
a whole, and perhaps a l s o De Mauro's Introduzione aZZa semantics of t h e
same y e a r ( c f . De Yauro, 1969) b u t c e r t a i n l y w i t h much l e s s s u c c e s s i n
h i s rapprochement t o Saussure's l i n g u i s t i c t h o u g h t ; t h e r e s t , i t would
a p p e a r , have c o n t e n t e d themselves w i t h d i s c u s s i n g a p a r t i c u l a r a s p e c t
o f S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r y of t h e s i g n , e . g . t h e arbitraire, t h e Zine'mitg
du signifiant, t h e p r i n c i p l e of ( r e l a t i v e ) m o t i v a t i o n , t h e b i l a t e r a l
n a t u r e of t h e s i g n , and t h i s g e n e r a l l y by t a k i n g t h e concept i n q u e s t i o n
o u t of i t s c o n t e x t and d i s c u s s i n g i t i n t h e l i g h t of t h e i r own p r e c o n c e i v e d
ideas; 3) t h o s e s c h o l a r s who have shown a p a r t i c u l a r i n t e r e s t i n S a u s s u r e ' s
i d e a s about t h e s i g n c h a r a c t e r of language t u r n o u t f r e q u e n t l y t o b e
l o g i c i a n s and p h i l o s o p h e r s of language, e.g. E. O r t i g u e s ( l 9 6 2 ) , N. E.
C h r i s t e n s e n (1965), A. Schaff (1969), and a l s o De Mauro (1969), psycho-
l o g i s t s , e.g. F. Kainz (1961), K. ~ i i h l e r(1965), and H. ~ 6 r m a n n(1967),
2
o r c r i t i c s and t h e o r i s t s of l i t e r a t u r e , e.g. R . B a r t h e s (1967), T. Todorov,
3
J u l i a K r i s t e v a (1969) and J. T r a b a n t , t o name o n l y t h e s e few.4 Unfor-
t u n a t e l y , t h e a s p e c t of l i n g u i s t i c s which we b e l i e v e t o b e c r u c i a l h a s
n o t r e c e i v e d from l i n g u i s t s t h e k i n d of a t t e n t i o n we c o n s i d e r a p p r o p r i a t e .
However, even t h e q u i t e numerous i n s t a n c e s , where s c h o l a r s working
i n a r e a s o u t s i d e l i n g u i s t i c s p r o p e r have adopted p a r t i c u l a r a s p e c t s of
S a u s s u r e ' s s i g n t h e o r y , do n o t r e v e a l much s u p e r i o r i t y w i t h r e g a r d t o
t h e reworking and i n t e g r a t i o n of S a u s s u r e ' s i d e a s i n t o a s y s t e m a t i c
whole. O r t i g u e s , f o r example, approaches t h e problem of t h e s i g n from
a post-Kantian a n g l e and, i n view of i t s symbolizing q u a l i t i e s , d e v o t e s
 a t t e n t i o n t o t h e s i g n i f i ~ / s i g n i f i a n t d i s t i n c t i o n (1962 :54-60)
w i t h o u t d i s c u s s i n g t h e a r b i t m i r e o r o t h e r n o t i o n s (except f o r a b r i e f
mention of uaZeur) s u r r o u n d i n g t h e b i l a t e r a l n a t u r e of t h e s i g n . Chris-
t e n s e n , on t h e o t h e r hand, a t t e m p t s t o e x p l o i t Saussurean c o n c e p t s (mainly
i n t h e l i g h t of Hjelmslevian i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s ) i n o r d e r t o i l l u s t r a t e
l i n g u i s t i c n o t i o n s of meaning (1965:179-91) without o f f e r i n g anything
c o n c l u s i v e f o r e i t h e r t h e l i n g u i s t o r t h e p h i l o s o p h e r of language.
But i t i s only f a i r t o add t h a t C h r i s t e n s e n , a s a p h i l o s o p h e r , h a s b e e n
handicapped n o t s o much by h i s own l i m i t e d a c q u a i n t a n c e w i t h l i n g u i s t i c s
b u t much more by t h e f a c t t h a t l i n g u i s t s h a v e u n t i l today f a i l e d t o
p r o v i d e a n a d e q u a t e t h e o r e t i c a l framework f o r t h e d i s c u s s i o n of t h e
language s i g n and t h e problems s u r r o u n d i n g i t . A . Schaff (1969:15)
s t r e s s e s t h e importance o f t h e C o w s i n p a r t i c u l a r b e c a u s e of i t s
II
numerous t h e o r e t i c a l consequences", b u t t h e remainder of h i s d e t a i l e d
s t u d y on ( p h i l o s o p h i c a l ) s e m a n t i c s r e v e a l s t h e a u t h o r ' s i n a b i l i t y t o come
t o terms w i t h S a u s s u r e 's s u g g e s t i o n s . S i m i l a r o b s e r v a t i o n s can b e made
mutatis mutandis about t h e work o f o t h e r s who have adopted c e r t a i n
i n g r e d i e n t s of S a u s s u r e f s t e a c h i n g s , f o r i n s t a n c e t h e works of Kainz
(1961) o r Hcrmann (1967), though t h e l a t t e r makes p a r t i c u l a r u s e of
Biihler 's (1965: 33ff .) s u g g e s t i o n s ( c f . HGrmann, 1971:18f f .) containing
a communicational model of t h e s i g n which, though i n p a r t i n s p i r e d from
c e r t a i n a s p e c t s of S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r y , i s f a r removed from t h e i d e a s p u t
forward i n t h e C o w s ,
I n c o n t r a s t t o t h e s e , i t a p p e a r s t h a t t h e r e have b e e n i n r e c e n t
y e a r s a number of s c h o l a r s i n t h e f i e l d of l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m and p o e t i c
t h e o r y whose w r i t i n g s d e p i c t some a t t e m p t t o c r e a t e a s i g n t h e o r y which
h a s been i n s p i r e d by s u g g e s t i o n s made by S a u s s u r e , a t t e m p t s which d a t e
back a t l e a s t t o J a n ~ u k a ; o v s k ~ ' s programmatic paper of 1 9 3 6 , ~ b u t
p o s s i b i l y even t o t h e R u s s i a n F o r m a l i s t s of t h e 1920s ( c f . Erlich, 1969:
1 5 6 f f .) . I n t h i s r e s p e c t Roland B a r t h e s ' EZGments de s6rrioZogie of
1964 may b e s a i d t o mark a major breakthrough i n t h e e x p l o i t a t i o n of
7
S a u s s u r e f s s u g g e s t i o n s about t h e c r e a t i o n of a s c i e n c e of s i g n systems.
Barthes however r e j e c t s S a u s s u r e ' s c l a i m t h a t l i n g u i s t i c s c o n s t i t u t e s a
p a r t i c u l a r form of a g e n e r a l semiology - Barthes ignores t h e f a c t t h a t
S a u s s u r e c o n t r a s t e d l a n g u a g e w i t h o t h e r systems of s i g n s by emphasizing
t h e a r b i t r a r y n a t u r e of t h e former i n o p p o s i t i o n t o t h e l a t t e r which
are r e l a t i v e l y m o t i v a t e d ( c f . CLG, 110) - and indeed h e r e v e r s e s t h e
argument by s a y i n g t h a t "every s e m i o l o g i c a l system h a s i t s l i n g u i s t i c
admixture. " ( B a r t h e s , 1967: 1 0 ) . It i s probably t r u e t h a t l i n g u i s t i c
p r o p e r t i e s u n d e r l i e most of t h e s e m i o l o g i c a l systems w e are aware o f ,
e s p e c i a l l y t h e highway code, t h e s i g n a l s used by s h i p s , e t c . , a l t h o u g h
a d i s t i n c t i o n would have t o b e made ( a s Buyssens h a s p o i n t e d o u t ) between
s i g n systems which can b e understood o n l y i f one i s f a m i l i a r w i t h t h e
language u n d e r l y i n g a s p e c i f i c code, e.g. t h e Morse code, and t h o s e which
h a v e no l i n g u i s t i c b a s i s a t a l l , e.g. f a s h i o n ( c f . B a r t h e s , l967:33f .) .
I n B a r t h e s ' views semiology i s "perhaps d e s t i n e d t o b e absorbed i n t o a
trans-Zinguistics, t h e m a t e r i a l s of which may b e myth, n a r r a t i v e , j o u r -
n a l i s m , o r on t h e o t h e r hand o b j e c t s of o u r c i v i l i z a t i o n " i n s o f a r a s
t h e y a r e t r a n s m i t t e d oraZZy, through p r e s s , i n t e r v i e w , c o n v e r s a t i o n , e t c .
(1967: 1 1 ) . The "performance" a s p e c t of semiology h a s l e d B a r t h e s i n t h e
s u b s e q u e n t c h a p t e r t o e x t e n d l i n g u i s t i c s t o a l i n g u i s t i c s of parole
(something which S a u s s u r e e n v i s a g e d b u t never developed on t h e o r e t i c a l
grounds) and, what i s more s t r i k i n g , t o e q u a t e semiology w i t h t h i s
h i g h l y r e s t r i c t e d concept of l i n g u i s t i c s ( c f . Z4f f .) . Barthes l a t e r
t a k e s up a number of o t h e r Saussurean s u g g e s t i o n s , i n p a r t i c u l a r t h e
signifig/signifiant d i s t i n c t i o n (1967: 35-57) and t h e two a x e s of s y t a g -
m a t i c and a s s o c i a t i v e r e l a t i o n s ( 5 8 f f . ) , a l l of which h e r e d e f i n e s i n
terms of h i s own c o n c e p t i o n of s e m i o l o g i c a l t h e o r y , t o t h e e x t e n t t h a t
w e c a n acknowledge h i s t e n t a t i v e c o d i f i c a t i o n a s a f i r s t s t e p towards
a semiology w i t h i n t h e framework of s o c i o l o g y , many i n g r e d i e n t s of which
have t h e i r u l t i m a t e sources i n t h e Cows.
However, B a r t h e s ' i d e a s may l e a d t o d i f f u s i o n of m a t t e r s which a r e
c e r t a i n l y of importance t o l i n g u i s t i c s p r o p e r , v i z . ~ a r t h e s 'misconception
of t h e S a u s s u r e a n n o t i o n of langue (1967:23ff.) and t h e a r b i t r a i r e (5Off .),
and t h e r e i s a danger t h a t t h i s could r e s u l t i n l i n g u i s t i c s becoming
a n c i l l a r y t o t h e g e n e r a l s c i e n c e of semiology, something t h a t was c e r t a i n l y
n o t S a u s s u r e ' s i n t e n t i o n and, indeed, we b e l i e v e cannot b e t h e i n t e n t i o n
of any s e r i o u s s t u d e n t of l i n g u i k t i c s , s i n c e t h i s c o u l d o n l y b e t o t h e
d e t r i m e n t of l i n g u i s t i c s a s a s c i e n c e i n i t s own r i g h t .
It i s t r u e t h a t t h e Cours i n v i t e s more t h a n one i n t e r p r e t a t i o n ,
i n p a r t i c u l a r where t h e language s i g n is concerned. I n most of t h e
passages i n which t h e p r i n c i p l e of t h e s i g n i s o u t l i n e d , S a u s s u r e a p p e a r s ,
i n agreement w i t h t r a d i t i o n a l usage, b u t p o s s i b l y a l s o under t h e i n f l u e n c e
o f Kruszewski ( c f . 1.3.3.3) o r I?. N. ~ i n c k , ' t o have e x e m p l i f i e d h i s
i d e a s w i t h t h e h e l p of a word i n i s o l a t i o n ( s . CLG, 9 8 f f . ) , a procedure
which we b e l i e v e c o n t r a s t s s h a r p l y w i t h h i s c l a i m t h a t a s i g n does n o t
e x i s t by i t s e l f b u t o n l y by v i r t u e of i t s c o - e x i s t e n c e w i t h o t h e r s ( c f .
CLG, 1 6 6 f f . ) . Again, t h e e d i t o r s of t h e Cours appear t o h a v e m i s l e d
t h e r e a d e r when t h e y s t a t e d t h a t t h e word "malgrg l a d i f f i c u l t 6 qu'on
a 5 l e d g f i n i r , e s t une u n i t 6 q u i s'impose $ l ' e s p r i t " (CLG, 154) whereas
t h e sources i n d i c a t e t h a t Saussure advised h i s s t u d e n t s t o question t h e
t r a d i t i o n a l (and r a t h e r a r b i t r a r y ) s e p a r a t i o n of words i n w r i t i n g ( s .
9
CLG(E), 250). I n o t h e r c o n t e x t s , S a u s s u r e may have s u g g e s t e d t h a t h e
regarded t h e syntagm a s a s i g n , as E. S o l l b e r g e r thought a p p r o p r i a t e t o
deduce from t h e C o w s ( s . CFS l l : 4 5 f .), a l t h o u g h S a u s s u r e d i d i n f a c t
s p e a k of unit6 and n o t of signe i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h t h e syntagm ( c f . LTS,
49f .).lo Godel (SM, 210) s u g g e s t s t h a t S a u s s u r e might even have t h o u g h t
of t h e p o s s i b i l i t y of c o n s i d e r i n g a whole p h r a s e l i k e " t h e man I h a v e
seen1' as a u n i t of l i n g u i s t i c o r g a n i z a t i o n . Moreover, we b e l i e v e t h a t
S a u s s u r e ' s f r e q u e n t l y used s i m i l e of t h e game of c h e s s i n c o n n e c t i o n
w i t h h i s e x p l a n a t i o n of t h e s y s t e m a t i c c h a r a c t e r of language (CLG, 43)
and i t s change (125-7), t h e v a l u e of i t s elements (153f.), and on o t h e r
o c c a s i o n s ( c f . CLG, l 8 5 ) , and, i n p a r t i c u l a r , h i s emphasis on t h e dis-
t i n c t i v e n a t u r e of t h e language s i g n (167) may h a v e l e d a number of
s c h o l a r s t o t a k e t h e phoneme a s such a u n i t of l i n g u i s t i c e x p r e s s i o n ,
e s p e c i a l l y s i n c e S a u s s u r e d i d n o t g i v e any examples when h e used t h e
comparison and a t t r i b u t e d t o t h e phoneme such a d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g f u n c t i o n
( c f . CLG, 83, 164, 303).
A s a r e s u l t of t h e s e v a r i o u s remarks i n t h e Cours, t h e l i n g u i s t i c
s i g n h a s been i d e n t i f i e d w i t h t h e 1 ) word a s S a u s s u r e s u g g e s t e d f r e q u e n t l y
( c f . SM, 208f.), e.g. Brdndal (1943:119ff.), B o l i n g e r (Lingua 12:113ff.),
and ~ r b m s k f ( l 9 6 7 f f . ) , l l 2) morbheme, e.g. B a z e l l ( c f . RiL 11, 329ff .),
A n t a l ( l 9 6 l f f .),l2and many o t h e r s , i n p a r t i c u l a r " ~ l o o m f i e l d i a n " des-
criptivists, 3 ) moname, e.g. F r e i (CFS 1:51), S o l l b e r g e r (CFS l l : 4 5 f . ) ,
and M a r t i n e t (1967:15), 4) syntagm, a g a i n S o l l b e r g e r and F r e i (Lingua
12:426), 5) p h r a s e s and p o s s i b l y a l s o whole s e n t e n c e s , e.g. F r e i (Zoc.
cit. ), M a r t i n e t ( l o c . c i t . ) , and Kamlah,13 and 6) t h e phoneme, e.g.
Kollmar-Kulleschitz, F r o e h l i c h , and B e l a r d i , t o name a few more r e c e n t
s t a t e m e n t s t o t h i s e f f e c t .14 The a p p a r e n t l a t i t u d e of S a u s s u r e ' s t e r m
h a s l e d , a s we h a v e s u g g e s t e d , t o a v a r i e t y of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s . Perhaps
i t was t h i s t h a t caused Ullmann t o propose t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between t h e
f o l l o w i n g c a r d i n a l s i g n s each of which corresponds t o a p a r t i c u l a r l e v e l
of a n a l y s i s : phoneme (phonology), word ( l e x i c o l o g y ) , and syntagm ( s y n t a x ) ,
e x c l u d i n g however t h e morpheme and t h e l e v e l of morphology ( a l t h o u g h
S a u s s u r e d e s i g n a t e d t h e l a t t e r " l a t h g o r i e d e s s i g n e s , e t non d e s forrnes",
c f . LTS, 35) from i t s r i g h t f u l p o s i t i o n ( c f . Word 2:116).
S i m i l a r o b s e r v a t i o n s c a n b e made about o t h e r a s p e c t s of S a u s s u r e ' s
t h e o r y of t h e s i g n , f o r example t h e concept of t h e a r b i t r a i r e , a s we
have mentioned e a r l i e r ( c f . 2.2.3.2, and Engler, 1962:12-40), t h e concept
of m o t i v a t i o n i n language, o r t h e l i n e a r i t y of t h e s i g n i f i a n t , though
t h e l a t t e r h a s b e e n more g e n e r a l l y a c c e p t e d , perhaps simply b e c a u s e o n l y
a few h a v e r e a l i z e d i t s t h e o r e t i c a l i m p l i c a t i o n s , 1 5 a s s h o u l d by now have
become e v i d e n t from Godel's work ( s . SM, 203-7). Where t h e p r i n c i p l e of
m o t i v a t i o n i s concerned (which i s t o b e s e e n a s l i m i t i n g t h e o p e r a t i o n
of t h e a r b i t r a i r e ) ,a s u r p r i s i n g l y l a r g e number of l i n g u i s t s h a v e m i s -
understood S a u s s u r e ' s argument and, i n a d d i t i o n , d i s r e g a r d e d what h e
had t o s a y a b o u t onomatopoetic f o r m a t i o n of words ( s . CLG, 1 0 1 f . ) and
have c o n s e q u e n t l y wasted t h e i r t i m e i n a n i l l - a d v i s e d a t t e m p t t o i n v a l i d a t e
Saussure's claim. A s a n i n s t a n c e of such an i l l - f o u n d e d a t t e m p t t o
i n v e s t i g a t e l i n g u i s t i c m o t i v a t i o n , we must mention P . ~ i c l z u ' sr e c e n t
monograph Le S i g n e Z i n g u i s t i q u e , i n which t h e a u t h o r d i s t i n g u i s h e s be-
tween f o u r k i n d s of l o s s of m o t i v a t i o n : 1 ) p h o n e t i c change, 2) l o s s
of morphological e n t i t i e s o r l e x i c a l s u f f i x e s , 3 ) s e m a n t i c change, and
4) borrowing [ s i c ] (s. ~ i c l z u ,1970:212). Although h e d i s c u s s e s S a u s s u r e ' s
p r i n c i p l e s of t h e a r b i t r a i r e and m o t i v a t i o n a t l e n g t h (1970:85-95), he
s u g g e s t s a n i n v e s t i g a t i o n of t h e problem of m o t i v a t i o n "sous l ' a n g l e
k i s t o r i q u e e t comparatif [ i . e . comparing s t a t i s t i c a l r e s u l t s o f French
and Rumanian] " (87) , although Saussure c l e a r l y pointed t o s t r u c t u r a l ,
i.e. s y c h r o n i c , forms of m o t i v a t i o n , e.g. d e r i v a t i o n , compounding, word
f a m i l i e s , and any o t h e r form of s y n t a g m a t i c and a s s o c i a t i v e r e l a t i o n s
( c f . CLG, l 8 l f f .), a s h i s t o r i c a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s p l a y i n g a m a r g i n a l r c l e
only ( s . 184).
With r e g a r d t o t h e c r e a t i o n of a s e m i o l o g i c a l t h e o r y o f l a n g u a g e
i n t h e framework of S a u s s u r e ' s s u g g e s t i o n s , w e have t o s t a t e t h a t u n t i l
t h e p r e s e n t day no such t h e o r y h a s b e e n proposed by any l i n g u i s t , a l t h o u g h
t h e r e h a v e b e e n c e r t a i n a t t e m p t s i n t h e p a s t , n o t a b l y by E. Buyssens
and L. Hjelmslev, a s w e l l a s a n o t a b l e i n c r e a s e i n s e m i o l o g i c a l o r
s e m i o t i c problems i n general,16 and a l s o i n p u b l i c a t i o n s e s p e c i a l l y
concerned w i t h l i n g u i s t i c problems of t h e s i g n . 1 7 It a p p e a r s t h a t
Buyssens' e s s a y of 1943 d i d a p p e a l t o a number of n o n - l i n g u i s t s b u t n o t
t o t h o s e concerned w i t h l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y ; 1 8 h i s completely reworked
e d i t i o n of 1967 h a s won merely nodding a c c e p t a n c e d e s p i t e t h e a u t h o r ' s
s e r i o u s a t t e m p t t o o u t l i n e t h e p r i n c i p l e s of a semiology i n which l i n -
g u i s t i c s p l a y s a pre-eminent r 6 l e ( c f . Buyssens, 1967:78-166). Hjelmslev's
a t t e m p t t o e x p l o i t S a u s s u r e ' s s u g g e s t i o n s a b o u t language a s a system of
s i g n s cannot b e r e g a r d e d a s a s u c c e s s ( c f . PTL, 4, 41-7, 48, 5 7 f . , 65-7,
etc.) , despite a number of s t a t e m e n t s t o t h e c o n t r a r y ( c f . Apresjan,
1971:64f.), s i n c e Hjelmslev f a i l s t o a c c o u n t f o r t h e d i a c h r o n i c a s p e c t
of language ( c f . 2.2.2.3), t h e r e l a t i v e n a t u r e of ualezlr, and f a i l s
t o c o n v i n c i n g l y r e l a t e h i s t h e o r y t o t h e f a c t s of language, r e q u i r e m e n t s
which were s o d e a r t o Saussure. Another i m p o r t a n t component of S a u s s u r e ' s
d o c t r i n e h a s b e e n n e g l e c t e d w i t h o u t which t h e semiology S a u s s u r e had
c a l l e d f o r cannot do i t s a p p r o p r i a t e job: t h e a r b i t r a i r e (which H j e l m s l e v
mentioned o n l y an passant [PTL, 9 7 1 ) .
I n a d d i t i o n t o P. ~ i c l z u ' sa b o r t i v e a t t e m p t t o make u s e of p r o p o s a l s
o u t l i n e d i n t h e Cows c o n c e r n i n g m o t i v a t i o n of l i n g u i s t i c s i g n s , two
more s ' t u d i e s appeared i n 1970 which t r e a t a s p e c t s of ~ a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r i e s
a b o u t t h e language s i g n . Georg S t 6 t z e l i n v e s t i g a t e s i n h i s Ausdrucksseite
wzd InhaZtsseite der Sprache p r o c e d u r e s of word morphology on t h e b a s i s
of S a u s s u r e ' s emphasis on t h e b i l a t e r a l n a t u r e of t h e s i g n and by t a k i n g
up t h e post-Saussurean t h e o r i e s of dependency grammar which a r e b a s e d
on t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between p a r a d i g m a t i c and s y n t a g m a t i c r e l a t i o n s and t h e
concept of v a l u e , e.g. t h e work of I,. ~ e s n i G r e( c f . 2.2.4.3);19 however
h e p r o v i d e s something i n t h e way of a c r i t i c a l account of modern t h e o r i e s
r a t h e r t h a n an o u t l i n e of a p a r t i c u l a r t h e o r y which aims t o d e v e l o p
Saussurean concepts f u r t h e r . H.-M. Gauger's monograph Wort und Sprache,
devoted t o "sprachwissenschaftliche Grundfragen" a s i t s s u b t i t l e i n d i c a t e s ,
i s no less d i s a p p o i n t i n g t o someone l o o k i n g f o r a p a r t i c u l a r a t t e m p t
t o e s t a b l i s h a t l e a s t a t h e o r e t i c a l framework w i t h i n which S a u s s u r e ' s
20
s e m i o l o g i c a l i d e a s c a n a t t a i n t h e s t a t u s of a s c i e n c e .
The s u r e l y r e g r e t t a b l e development which we have r e f e r r e d t o a t t h e
b e g i n n i n g of t h i s c h a p t e r , namely t h a t S a u s s u r e ' s i d e a s about language
as a system of s i g n s have b e e n t a k e n up by n o n - l i n g u i s t s and c o d i f i e d
i n a f a s h i o n q u i t e d i s s i m i l a r from S a u s s u r e ' s i n t e n t i o n s and h i s t h e o r y
as a whole, such a development which h a s b e e n t o t h e d e t r i m e n t of l i n -
g u i s t i c s (which S a u s s u r e wished t o make i n t o an autonomous s c i e n c e )
could o n l y h a v e happened simply b e c a u s e l i n g u i s t s themselves have f a i l e d
t o work S a u s s u r e ' s s u g g e s t i o n s a b o u t t h e s e m i o l o g i c a l n a t u r e of language
i n t o a g e n e r a l t h e o r y of language.21 They have i n s t e a d l i m i t e d themselves
t o an e x p o s i t i o n of a p p a r e n t paradoxes and c o n t r a d i c t i o n s i n S a u s s u r e ' s
t e a c h i n g s o r a t t e m p t s t o r e d e f i n e some a s p e c t s of h i s t h e o r y w i t h o u t
t a k i n g i n t o account t h e whole framework w i t h i n which t h e p a r t s h a v e been
defined.
Our c r i t i c i s m , i t must b e conceded, does n o t apply t o a l l l i n g u i s t i c
work i n t h e post-Saussurean paradigm, f o r t h e r e a r e some s c h o l a r s who d e s e r v e
s p e c i a l mention f o r having a t l e a s t a t t e m p t e d a linguistic semiology o r ,
perhaps more c o r r e c t l y , a s i g n t h e o r y of language. On t h e o t h e r hand,
t h e r e a r e a number of i n g r e d i e n t s of S a u s s u r e ' s s i g n t h e o r y which s t i l l
a w a i t c l a r i f i c a t i o n ; they have f r e q u e n t l y been s u b j e c t t o h e a t e d d e b a t e
and c o n t r o v e r s y b u t n o t e l u c i d a t e d t o an e x t e n t t h a t t h e y would g a i n
g e n e r a l acceptance. The problem'of t h e arbitraire i n p a r t i c u l a r , though
i t r e c e i v e d a v e r y p e n e t r a t i n g t r e a t m e n t i n E n g l e r P s s t u d y of 1962, h a s
n o t y e t b e e n s a t i s f a c t o r i l y s e t t l e d , and E n g l e r ' s s u g g e s t i o n s h a v e un-
f o r t u n a t e l y f a i l e d t o h a v e t h e impact t h e problem d e s e r v e s . Y e t more
b a s i c problems appear t o b e surrounded by c o n f u s i o n s and m i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g s ,
22
and o n l y a few of them h a v e b e e n r e f e r r e d t o i n t h i s b r i e f overview.
 FOOTNOTES 2 . 2 . 3 . 3

1
See E. F. K. Koerner, Contribution au d&t post-saussurien sur
Ze signe Zinguistique: Introduction gknZraZe e t bibliographic annotZe
(= Approaches t o S e m i o t i c s ; Paperback S e r i e s ) (The Hague: Mouton [ i n
press] ) .
Cf. Tzvetan Todorov, "La d e s c r i p t i o n d e l a s i g n i f i c a t i o n en lit-
t 6 r a t u r e 1 ' , Communications ( P a r i s ) 4:33-9.

J u r g e n T r a b a n t , Zur Semiologie des literarisehen Kunstwerks:

GZossematik und Literaturtheorie (Munich: W. F i n k , 1970).
4
S. Koerner, op. c i t . , e s p . n o t e 36 f o r a l i s t of two dozen f u r t h e r
s t u d i e s i n semiology. An i n t e r e s t i n g book, n o t i n c l u d e d i n t h e l i s t
i s t h a t of L. 0. Reznikov, E"rkenntnistheoretische Fragen der Semiotik ,
t r a n s l . from t h e Russ. by Werner Winkler ( B e r l i n : Deutscher V e r l a g d e r
Wissenschaf t e n , 19 68).

Schaff h a s devoted much a t t e n t i o n t o t h e language s i g n ; c f . h i s

a r t i c l e s , " S p e c i f i c F e a t u r e s of t h e V e r b a l Sign", To Honor Roman Jakobson
111, 1744-56, "De l a s p e c i f i c i t $ du s i g n e v e r b a l " , Langage e t conmissanee
by A. Schaff ( P a r i s : Anthropos, 1969);319-36, and most r e c e n t l y , "Spe-
c i f i c F e a t u r e s of t h e V e r b a l Sign", Sign-Language-CuZture/Signe-langage-
cuZture, e t c . , ed. by A . J . Greimas, R . Jakobson, e t a l . (The Hague:
Mouton), 113-23, a paper which b e t o k e n s t h e a u t h o r ' s i g n o r a n c e of r e c e n t
p u b l i c a t i o n s on t h i s t o p i c i n g e n e r a l and of t h e l i n g u i s t i c i m p l i c a t i o n s
of FdS1s t h e o r y i n p a r t i c u l a r .

Cf. J . ~ u k a ; o v s k ~ , " L ' a r t c o m e f a i t s $ m i ~ l o g i q u u e ~Aetes

~, du
Huitizme Congr2s internatiomZ de Phi Zosophie (Prague: Cornit 6 d 'organi-
s a t i o n du Congr&, 1936), 1065-72.

Cf. a l s o J.-M. G a r d a i r , "Roland Barthes", Belfagor ( F l o r e n c e )

23:50-77 (1968), f o r a n a c c o u n t of B a r t h e s ' t h e o r i e s . Cf. a l s o t h e
r e c e n t works of B a r t h e s , S / Z ( P a r i s : Ed. du S e u i l , 1970), and L'empire
des signes (Geneva: Ed. S k i r a , 1970).

F i n c k (1905: 30) s t a t e d : "Das Wort i s t d e r K l e i n s t e , n i c h t i n

bestimmter Weise a n a n d e r e Lautkomplexe gebundener B e s t a n d t e i l d e r Rede".

I n one of h i s f i r s t l e c t u r e s a t t h e Univ. of Geneva i n 1891,

FdS noted: "I1 y a u r a un j o u r un l i v r e s p g c i a l e t t r & i n t g r e s s a n t
 352
2 6 c r i r e s u r l e r c l e du mot comme p r i n c i p a l p e r t u r b a t e u r d e l a s c i e n c e
d e s mots. I' (Quoted by Engler i n G S 22 :35) . .
Cf a l s o SM, 2O8f. where
Godel d i s c u s s e s FdS's d i f f i c u l t i e s i n t a k i n g t h e word as a " u n i t 6 p a r
excellence".

lo H. F r e i (Lingua 12:426) f a i l s t o s u b s t a n t i a t e h i s c l a i m t h a t FdS

11
c o n s i d 6 r a i t l e syntagme comme s i g n e t ' .

.
l1 Cf ~i;iKrgmskf, m e Word as a O L i p i s t i c Unit (The Hague:
Mouton, 1969).

l2Cf. 1 1 ~ ~ A
1 n6t a l , Questions of Meaning (The Hague: Mouton, 1963).
.
l3 Cf Wilhem Kamlah, " S p r a c h l i c h e Handlungsschemata", Problem der
Sprache, 427-34 (1967); a c c o r d i n g t o K. a language s i g n may have t h e
form of a morpheme, word o r a n i d i o m a t i c e x p r e s s i o n .

.
l4Cf F. Kollmar-Kulleschitz, "1st d a s Phonem e i n s p r a c h l i c h e s
Zeichen?", Phonetics 5: 65-75 (19 60) ; P. A. F r o e h l i c h , "The Phoneme,
Meaning, and P a t t e r n i n g " , AZfa ( M a v i l l a , B r a z i l ) 4: 107-10 ( l 9 6 2 ) , and
W. B e l a r d i , "I1 ' s i g n i f i c a t o ' d e l fonema", Word 23:25-36 (1967[1969]).

l5W e may r e c a l l R. Jakobson's dictum t h a t FdS's p r i n c i p l e of t h e

II
c a r a c t z r e l i n g a i r e du s i g n i f i a n t " i s "nothing b u t a v i c i o u s c i r c l e "
(TCLC 5:20 [I9491 = SW I, 420); c f . a l s o SW I, 3 0 4 f f . , 636, and 6 5 5 f .
However, FdS was concerned w i t h t h e l i n g u i s t i c s i g n and n o t , a s Jakobson
s u g g e s t s , w i t h t h e d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g c h a r a c t e r of phonemes, when h e formu-
l a t e d t h e l i n e a r n a t u r e of t h e " s i g n i f i a n t s a c o u s t i q u e s " (CLG, 1 0 3 ) .
For a r e c e n t paper on t h i s t o p i c , s. A. Henry, "La l i n g a r i t g du s i g n i f i a n t " ,
Homage Buyssens , 87-9 2 (19 70) .
l6 Cf. t h e proceedings of an i n t e r n a t i o n a l c o n g r e s s on s e m i o t i c s
h e l d i n Poland i n 1965, Sign, Language, CuZture/Signe, Zangage, culture/
Znak, jqzyk, kuZtura, e t c . comp. by A. J. Greimas, R. Jakobson, e t a l .
(The Hague: Mouton, 1970), i n p a r t i c u l a r t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n s by l i n g u i s t s ,
e.g. L. Zawadowski, A. J . Greimas, S. S i a t k o w s k i , and Holger S. Sdrensen.

l7 Cf. Bibliographia Saussureana, 1870-1970, P a r t 111 Sec. 4. ( c )

f o r a b r i e f overview of t h e v a r i o u s a s p e c t s of t h e post-Saussurean develop-
ment of t h e s i g n t h e o r y ( e x c l u d i n g , of c o u r s e , t h o s e developments which
have t h e i r s o u r c e i n t h e work of t h e p h i l o s o p h e r C h a r l e s Sanders P e i r c e
[1839-19141) .
.
l8 Cf E. Buyssens ' b o o k l e t , Les Langues e t Ze discours: Essai de
Zinguistique fonctionnelte duns Ze cadre de Za s2mioZogie ( B r u s s e l s :
O f f i c e d e l a ~ u b l i c i t g , 1943).

l9 See S t S t z e l (1970); c f . a l s o t h e b r i e f summary i n Ling. Berichte

1:46-7 (1969).
 20 T h i s i s p a r t i c u l a r l y r e g r e t t a b l e s i n c e Gauger a n a l y z e s and,
a t t i m e s , c r i t i c i z e s F d S f s i d e a s and s u g g e s t s i n t e r e s t i n g r e c t i f i c a t i o n s ,
v i z . F d S f s concept of language and i t s s c i e n t i f i c t r e a t m e n t (Gauger,
1970:4-20[passim]), h i s i d e a s a b o u t t h e word and t h e language s i g n
(48, 5 1 f . , 56, 58, 62-4, 67f., 73, 7 8 ) , t h e problem of m o t i v a t i o n . a n d
t h e a r b i t r a i r e (90-108 [ p a s s i m ] , 110 and 113) .
Note t h a t t h e t e x t amounts
t o o n l y 127 pages.

21 We wish t o p o i n t o u t t h a t w e have no o b j e c t i o n s t o s c h o l a r s
working o u t s i d e l i n g u i s t i c s p r o p e r , e.g. Maurice Merleau-Ponty (1908-61)
i n philosophy o r Claude ~ & it - r asu s s i n anthropology, t a k i n g up i d e a s
from t h e CLG f o r t h e e l u c i d a t i o n of t h e i r p a r t i c u l a r problems, b u t
t h e i r a c t i o n cannot b e r e g a r d e d a s a n excuse f o r l i n g u i s t s n o t t o s t r i v e
towards a t h e o r y of t h e i r own o b j e c t of i n v e s t i g a t i o n .

22 For a somewhat more d e t a i l e d s u r v e y , s . our i n t r o d u c t i o n t o t h e

work mentioned i n n o t e 1 of t h i s c h a p t e r . I n a r e c e n t a r t i c l e on t h e
language s i g n J a n W. F. Mulder ( c f . q u o t a t i o n a t t h e b e g i n n i n g of 2.2.3)
h a s emphasized t h e importance of FdS's t e a c h i n g i n developing h i s i d e a s
f u r t h e r . I n i t h e a l s o announces t h e p u b l i c a t i o n of a book e n t i t l e d
!Theory of t h e L i n g u i s t i c S i g n ( t o a p p e a r i n The Hague: Mouton) which
h e w r o t e i n c o l l a b o r a t i o n w i t h ~ g n d o rG. W. Hervey who shows s i m i l a r
t h e o r y o r i e n t a t i o n ( c f . Hervey, F u n c t i o n a l Semantics: A L i n g u i s t i c Theory
with A p p l i c a t i o n t o Pekingese ( D i s s . , Oxford Univ., 1970). I f t h e t i t l e
of t h e book i s a n i n d i c a t i o n of t h e b o o k ' s c o n t e n t s , t h e i r work could
e v e n t u a l l y f i l l a l o n g - f e l t l a c u n a i n t h e post-Saussurean development
of l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y .
 354

2.2.4 Language a s a System of R e l a t i o n s : t h e rapports syntag-

matiques e t a s s o c i a t i f s ahd Kindred Notions

So v i e l f i r l t i g d i e Wirkungen de Saussures
gewesen sind ( n i c h t zuZetzt auf Grund der
n i c h t ganz homogenen Nachschriften seiner
VorZesungen), muss er aZs Begriinder der
modernen Linguistik angesehen werden durch
d i e Auffassung der Sprache aZs imanentes
System, dmch d i e Aufwertung der Synehro-
n i e und den neuen ReZationsgedanken.
Gerhard H e l b i g (19 70: 42)

I n c o n t r a s t t o t h e p r i n c i p l e s of synchrony and d i a c h r o n y , Zangue

and parole, and t h o s e c o n c e r n i n g t h e language s i g n , c o n c e p t s which c a n
almost b e t r e a t e d i n i s o l a t i o n from o t h e r Saussurean n o t i o n s and which
perhaps r e g r e t t a b l y h a v e f o r t h e most p a r t been t a k e n o u t of t h e i r
o r i g i n a l c o n t e x t by 20th-century l i n g u i s t s , S a u s s u r e ' s emphasis on t h e
s y s t e m a t i c n a t u r e of language and t h e v a r i o u s concepts a s s o c i a t e d w i t h
t h i s c l a i m p o i n t t o t h e damaging e f f e c t of t h e procedure of a b s t r a c t i n g
i s o l a t e d a s p e c t s s o c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of t h e post-Saussurean development i n
l i n g u i s t i c s ; t h i s g i v e s s t r e n g t h t o our own r e i t e r a t e d view, u n f o r t u n a t e l y
a l l t o o f r e q u e n t l y n e g l e c t e d , t h a t S a u s s u r e ' s i d e a s about language must
b e t a k e n as a whole, i . e . a s a n a t t e m p t t o c o n s t r u c t a complete g e n e r a l
t h e o r y of language which w i l l b e t h e o b j e c t of l i n g u i s t i c s c i e n c e .
Our own p r o c e d u r e h a s followed t h e s e t r a d i t i o n a l l i n e s , b u t n o t b e c a u s e
of i n t e l l e c t u a l i n d o l e n c e b u t b e c a u s e of t h e p a r t i c u l a r p e r s p e c t i v e
t a k e n i n o r d e r t o account f o r t h e post-Saussurean e v o l u t i o n of t h e i d e a s
proposed i n t h e Corns. S a u s s u r e ' s concern t o make l i n g u i s t i c s an autonomous
s c i e n c e independent of psychology, s o c i o l o g y , and o t h e r s o c i a l and moral
s c i e n c e s , e.g. h i s t o r y , l e d him t o s u g g e s t t h e s c i e n c e of s i g n systems,
i.e. semiology. H i s n e x t s t e p was t o d e f i n e t h e p r o p e r o b j e c t of t h i s
p a r t i c u l a r s c i e n c e of l i n g u i s t i c s , and i t h a s been i n t h e d e f i n i t i o n of
langue t h a t t h e concept of system took i t s a p p r o p r i a t e p l a c e .
 355

It s h o u l d b e r e c a l l e d and, indeed, i t cannot b e s u f f i c i e n t l y s t r e s s e d

t h a t S a u s s u r e was much concerned'about t h e u n i t y of l i n g u i s t i c s . It
was n o t merely h i s neogrammarian h e r i t a g e t h a t d i d n o t a l l o w him t o
abandon h i s t o r i c a l l i n g u i s t i c s i n favour of n o n - h i s t o r i c a l l i n g u i s t i c s
b u t h i s c o n v i c t i o n t h a t t h e l i n g u i s t cannot e s c a p e t h e f a c t s of language
change. On t h e o t h e r hand, a s n o t e d e a r l i e r ( c f . 2.2.1.2), Saussure
f r e q u e n t l y took a r a t i o n a l i s t p o s i t i o n i n p a r t i c u l a r when h e claimed
t h e l o g i c a l precedence of Zangue o v e r paroZe, b u t , and t h i s i s a n a s p e c t
of S a u s s u r e ' s a t t i t u d e towards language and i t s t r e a t m e n t which h a s
b e e n overlooked by t h e m a j o r i t y of t h e r e a d e r s of t h e C o w s , S a u s s u r e
was concerned, a s a second s t e p , t o r e l a t e h i s t h e o r y of language t o
t h e a c t u a l f a c t s ( c f . Engler's observations about Saussure's methodological
"Annsherung a n d i e ~ e a l i t g td e r Sprache" i n t h e c a s e of t h e a r b i t m i r e
and i t s v a r i o u s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s , VR 29:131 [1970]). This approach,
s o v e r y c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of S a u s s u r e , and p e d a g o g i c a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s may
a l s o have played a s i g n i f i c a n t rsle i n S a u s s u r e ' s l i n g u i s t i c argument,
can b e i l l u s t r a t e d by r e f e r e n c e t o t h e synchrony/diachrony d i s t i n c t i o n .
F i r s t l y , S a u s s u r e s t r e s s e s t h e d i s c r e t e n a t u r e of t h e s e two a s p e c t s t o
t h e e x t e n t t h a t h e termed on o c c a s i o n t h i s d i s t i n c t i o n a n antinomy ( c f .
CFS 15:66; CLG(E), 1 9 9 ) . H i s second s t e p a t t e m p t s t o r e c o n c i l e t h e s e
two a s p e c t s by proposing a panchronic view of language, a l t h o u g h i t must
b e noted t h a t h e d i d n o t wish t o a t t r i b u t e t o t h i s g e n e r a l i z i n g a s p e c t a
s t a t u s comparable t o t h a t of t h e o t h e r two ( c f . SM, 271; LTS, 3 8 ) .
Where S a u s s u r e ' s concept of system i n l a n g u a g e i s concerned, i t i s
n o t s u f f i c i e n t t o n o t e t h a t t h i s n o t i o n i s a t t h e h e a r t of h i s l i n g u i s t i c
t h e o r y b u t t h a t h e approached t h i s i d e a from e v e r y p o s s i b l e a n g l e i n
o r d e r t o s u b s t a n t i a t e h i s claim. We have p o i n t e d o u t e a r l i e r on s e v e r a l
o c c a s i o n s ( s . 1.1 and 2.2.3.2) t h a t t h e concept of s y s t e m was a t t h e
b a s i s of S a u s s u r e ' s l i n g u i s t i c argument a s e a r l y a s i n h i s Mzmoire of
1878 and i n f a c t a l r e a d y u n d e r l y i n g t h e i d e a s of t h e f i f t e e n - y e a r o l d
( c f . SW I, 7 4 3 f . ) . Moreover, i n h i s ~ 6 m o i r eo t h e r a s p e c t s a r e f o r e c a s t
which d i d l a t e r on become i m p o r t a n t f e a t u r e s of h i s g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c
t h e o r y , i n p a r t i c u l a r t h e i d e a t h a t a g i v e n i t e m h a s i t s e x i s t e n c e (and
v a l u e ) only b y v i r t u e of i t s i n t e r r e l a t i o n w i t h o t h e r s .
 A s h a s been shown i n t h e c a s e of o t h e r i d e a s propounded i n t h e
Cows, w e can d i s t i n g u i s h betweeh t h r e e s t e p s w i t h i n t h e development
of what h a s g e n e r a l l y been a c c e p t e d as t h e Saussurean c o n c e p t of l a n -
guage a s a system of i n t e r d e p e n d e n t and m u t u a l l y r e l a t e d terms: 1)
P r e c u r s o r s of S a u s s u r e ' s i d e a s , 2) t h e i n n e r development of S a u s s u r e ' s
r e f l e c t i o n s , and 3) post-Saussurean developmentsof h i s s u g g e s t i o n s .
A
2.2.4.1 T r a d i t i o n a l I d e a s a b o u t t h e S y s t e m a t i c Nature o f Language
1

NatGrZich, Sprache i s t e i n Bezeich-

nungssystem; was w&e aber e i n Sys-
tem ohne WechseZbedingtheit ?

A . F. P o t t i n 1833 ( s . Arens, 196%: 236)

Ever s i n c e t h e p u b l i c a t i o n of Bopp's Conjugationssystem i n 1816,

a n e v e n t which h a s t r a d i t i o n a l l y b e e n r e g a r d e d a s t h e b e g i n n i n g of
l i n g u i s t i c s a s a s c i e n c e i n i t s own r i g h t , t h e t e r m 'system' h a s been
used i n l i n g u i s t i c s c h o l a r s h i p . Indeed t h e r e h a s h a r d l y b e e n any s e r i o u s
s c h o l a r i n t h e two-and-a-half m i l l e n i a of w e s t e r n l i n g u i s t i c thought
who h a s denied t h a t language is i n some way s t r u c t u r e d . The n o t i o n of
system a s a p r i n c i p l e of a n a l y s i s however a p p e a r s t o have e n t e r e d l i n -
g u i s t i c s t u d i e s a t t h e b e g i n n i n g of t h e 1 9 t h c e n t u r y when Bopp, G r i m m ,
Rask, and t h e i r contemporaries were concerned w i t h c r e a t i n g a l i n g u i s t i c
s c i e n c e independent of o t h e r b r a n c h e s of human c u r i o s i t y , i n c l u d i n g
philosophy and p h i l o l o g y . S i n c e advances i n t h e n a t u r a l s c i e n c e s , i n
p a r t i c u l a r (comparative) anatomy and b i o l o g y , were an i m p o r t a n t f e a t u r e
of t h e i n t e l l e c t u a l paradigm of t h e f i r s t p a r t of t h e 1 9 t h c e n t u r y
(cf . 1.2.1) , i t i s no s u r p r i s e t h a t t h e term 'organism' s h o u l d h a v e
gained wide a c c e p t a n c e i n t h e l i n g u i s t i c s c h o l a r s h i p of t h e p a s t c e n t u r y ,
a term which S a u s s u r e h i m s e l f used q u i t e f r e q u e n t l y a s synonymous w i t h
system,' though c e r t a i n l y n o t w i t h S c h l e i c h e r i a n c o n n o t a t i o n s .
The view of language a s an organism l e d t o t h e concept of language
a s a system whose elements a r e ( o r g a n i c a l l y ) i n t e r r e l a t e d . The above
q u o t a t i o n from August F r i e d r i c h P o t t ' s (1802-87) f i r s t volume of h i s
i n f l u e n t i a l EtymoZogische Forschungen of 1833 may s t i l l b e r e g a r d e d a s
an i s o l a t e d Geistesb Zitz though we a l s o s u s p e c t t h a t t h i s o b s e r v a t i o n
was t h e r e s u l t of h i s e x t e n s i v e work i n Indo-European etymology. It
a p p e a r s however t h a t t h e n o t i o n of system i n language, which Mounin
(1968: 59f .) s e e k s t o e s t a b l i s h a s a well-known term i n t h e g e n e r a l
grammars of t h e mid-18th c e n t u r y , d i d n o t become a g e n e r a l l y a c c e p t e d
n o t i o n i n l i n g u i s t i c s u n t i l some t i m e d u r i n g t h e second h a l f of t h e 1 9 t h
c e n t u r y , probably under t h e i n f l r l e n c e of S c h l e i c h e r ' s t h e o r i e s . * We h a v e
p o i n t e d o u t e a r l i e r ( c f . 1.3.4.2.2) t h a t G. von d e r Gabelentz spoke of
s y s t e m on s e v e r a l o c c a s i o n s i n h i s Sprachwissenschaft of 1891, a book
which S a u s s u r e had i n h i s p e r s o n a l l i b r a r y ( c f . Godel, 1968: 117) . Gabe-
l e n t z opposed t h e view t h a t grammar c o n s t i t u t e s merely a n o r d e r e d c o l -
l e c t i o n of p r e s c r i p t i o n s and r e s t r i c t i o n s s t a t i n g t h a t h e r e g a r d s l i n -
g u i s t i c forms as c o n s t i t u t i n g a s y s t e m (1891:370 = Gabelentz, 1901:385).
A more r e v e a l i n g s t a t e m e n t t o t h i s e f f e c t w a s added by t h e e d i t o r of t h e
second e d i t i o n of Gabelentz 's book which appeared i n 1901; i t r e a d s :

J e d e r [ s i c ] Sprache i s t e i n System, d e s s e n s2immtliche T h e i l e

o r g a n i s c h zusammenhkgen und zusammenwirken. Man a h n t , k e i n e r
d i e s e r T h e i l e d i i r f t e f e h l e n o d e r a n d e r s s e i n , ohne d a s s d a s
Ganze v e r z n d e r t wiirde. (1901: 481) .
I n t h i s p a s s a g e ( i n which 'system' and ' o r g a n i c ' a r e n i c e l y c o l l o c a t e d )
t h e i n t e r d e p e n d e n c e of l i n g u i s t i c elements i s t h e prime c h a r a c t e r i s t i c
of language; absence of an element o r i t s change would a f f e c t t h e whole,
a n o b s e r v a t i o n which may c a l l t o mind S a u s s u r e ' s famous s i m i l e of l a n -
guage w i t h a game of c h e s s . I n 1904, Karl Brugmann makes a s i m i l a r
s t a t e m e n t i n h i s p r e f a c e t o t h e Kmze vergZeichende G r m a t i k which
d e s e r v e s q u o t a t i o n f o r r e a s o n s of h i s t o r i c a l j u s t i c e ( s i n c e i t would
3
seem t o b e l i e t h e t r a d i t i o n a l a c c u s a t i o n of neogrammarian 'atomism')
and a s an i l l u s t r a t i o n of our c l a i m t h a t t h e concept of language a s a
system of mutually r e l a t e d elements was ' i n t h e a i r ' a t t h e t i m e when
S a u s s u r e formulated h i s l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r i e s . Though a c t u a l l y e x p l a i n i n g
t h e procedures r e q u i r e d f o r t h e p r e p a r a t i o n of t h e a b r i d g e d e d i t i o n
of t h e Grundriss, Brugmann made t h e f o l l o w i n g s t a t e m e n t which i s of much
g r e a t e r s i g n i f i c a n c e t h a n i t s c o n t e x t seems t o imply:

Weil d a s Objekt d e r Gramrnatik, d i e Sprache, e i n e s e h r kompli-

z i e r t e menschliche T h z t i g k e i t i s t , b e i d e r d i e v e r s c h i e d e n a r -
t i g s t e n Faktoren i n gegenseitiger Abhzngigkeit zuv Ganzen zu-
s m e m i r k e n , b e i d e r i m Grunde aZZes dzlrch aZZes bedingt i s t ,
i s t auf diesem d r i t t e n Wege [ i . e . t h a t language ought t o b e
d e s c r i b e d i n more t h a n t h e t h r e e t r a d i t i o n a l (and q u i t e a r b i -
t r a r y ) l e v e l s of phonology, morphology, and s y n t a x ] zu einem d e r
 Natur d e s Gegenstandes annzhernd g e r e c h t werdenden System
und einem System m i t s c h z r f e r e n Grenzen zwischen den e i n -
z e l n e n T h e i l e n nur dadurch zu gelangen, d a s s man g l e i c h e i n e
b e t r s c h t l i c h l a n g e Reihe von H a u p t a b s c h n i t t e n nebeneinander
ansetzt 4 .
Although w e b e l i e v e t h a t Brugmann's s t a t e m e n t i s f a i r l y m a r g i n a l , i t
i s i n t e r e s t i n g t o n o t e t h a t two pages p r i o r t o t h i s p a s s a g e h e p o i n t e d
o u t t h a t t h e l i n g u i s t i c p u b l i c would have t o become more concerned w i t h
works such a s P a u l ' s Prinzipien, ~ i e v e r s 'Grundziige,and P h i l i p p Wegener's
(1848-1916) Untersuchungen iiber d i e Grundfragen des SprachZebens (Halle/S.:
Niemeyer, 1885), t h u s g i v i n g e v i d e n c e of a growing i n t e r e s t i n more
g e n e r a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s of language s t u d y .
However, n e i t h e r Gabelentz nor Brugmann f o r t h a t m a t t e r pursued
t h e s e remarks a b o u t t h e s y s t e m a t i c c h a r a c t e r of language and t h e i n t e r -
dependence of i t s elements, and S a u s s u r e could n o t have r e c e i v e d much
s u p p o r t from t h e i r f i n d i n g s f o r h i s own c o n v i c t i o n s . I n contrast t o
t h e s e , t h e work of H. P a u l and M. Kruszewski c o n t a i n e d much more of
i n t e r e s t t o t h e t h e o r y - o r i e n t a t e d Saussure. S a u s s u r e was by no means
c o n t e n t w i t h s t a t i n g t h a t language was a system of m u t u a l l y r e l a t e d
s i g n s b u t t r i e d t o s p e c i f y , a s f a r a s p o s s i b l e , t h e n a t u r e of t h e s e
r e l a t i o n s and t h e p r i n c i p l e s governing them, s i n c e b o t h P a u l and Kru-
szewski had made o b s e r v a t i o n s which S a u s s u r e could c e r t a i n l y n o t have
overlooked.
A s we have shown e a r l i e r ( s . 1.3.2.2.3), t h e r e i s much s u p p o r t
f o r our c l a i m t h a t P a u l ' s d i s t i n c t i o n between s t o f f l i e h e , formale and
stofflich-formale Gruppen a n t i c i p a t e d and p o s s i b l y s e r v e d a s a model f o r
S a u s s u r e ' s a s s o c i a t i v e r e l a t i o n s ( c f . CLG(E), 286-9). Moreover, we have
shown t h a t Kruszewski's o b s e r v a t i o n s about ' e x t e r n a l ' ( i . e . phonological
o r morphological) s i m i l a r i t i e s and ' i n t e r n a l ' ( i . e . semantic) s i m i l a r i t i e s ,
which h e based on t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between a s s o c i a t i o n s of s i m i l a r i t y and
a s s o c i a t i o n s of c o n t i g u i t y ( s . 1 . 3 . 3 . 3 ) , have c e r t a i n l y had an impact
on S a u s s u r e ' s i d e a s . ~ r u s z e w s k i ' s s t a t e m e n t s ( c f . Kruszewski, 1887:
1 7 1 f f . ) do n o t r e p r e s e n t remarks en passant b u t a r e l i n k e d w i t h h i s
d i s t i n c t i o n between t h e coercis tence ( r e s u l t i n g from s i m i l a r i t y ) and
elements (s. 1887:173; c f . a l s o 1887:156, 159; 1884:303). Indeed,
I
Kruszewski p o i n t e d out:

Wenn d i e Wijrter nach dem Gesetz der AhnZichkeitsassociation

Systeme oder Familien i n unserem Geiste bizden, so ordnen
s i e sich nach dem Gesetze der Angrenzungsassociution i n
Reihen. (1887:172 = Arens, 1969:360; spaced i n t h e o r i g i n a l ) .

Where t h e c o n n e c t i o n s of s i m i l a r i t y are concerned, S a u s s u r e h i m s e l f p o i n t e d

o u t i n h i s l e c t u r e s t h a t words such a s dzsireux, soucieux, maZheureux,
e t c . c o n s t i t u t e "groupes d ' a s s o c i a t i o n " which a r e "purement mentaux"
and c a l l e d them "families", c o n c e p t s which cannot always b e c l e a r l y
d e f i n e d ( c f . CLG(E), 289; s . a l s o p. 281). Kruszewski's o r d e r i n g of
words i n s e r i e s ("ordnen . . . i n Reihen") i n t h e c a s e of "syntagmatic
r e l a t i o n s 1 ' i s c l e a r l y p a r a l l e l e d i n S a u s s u r e ' s a f f i r m a t i o n t h a t sytagms
are o n l y e s t a b l i s h e d i n a one-dimensional f a s h i o n "dans l a c h a h e par16e"
o r i n t h e form of a " s u i t e l i n g a i r e " ( s . CLG(E), 277). It would a p p e a r
t h a t t h e term syntagm (G. "Anreihung") was coined by S a u s s u r e (though
p o s s i b l y f o l l o w i n g Kruszewski I s o r P a u l ' s s u g g e s t i o n s ) ; on t h e o t h e r
hand, h i s u s e of associative i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h h i s c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n
of terms a s s o c i a t e d w i t h each o t h e r i n absentia can probably b e t r a c e d
back t o Kruszewski.
However, b o t h P a u l and Kruszewski, though t h e y made i m p o r t a n t obser-
v a t i o n s about t h e manner i n which l i n g u i s t i c elements a r e a s s o c i a t e d i n
o u r mind, d i d n o t a t t e m p t t o work t h e s e i d e a s i n t o a t h e o r y of l i n g u i s t i c
mechanism, P a u l b e c a u s e h e f e l t overwhelmed by t h e m u l t i t u d e of connec-
t i o n s h e p e r c e i v e d , and Kruszewski b e c a u s e of h i s p r e d i l e c t i o n f o r micro-
l i n g u i s t i c problems, i . e . phonology and morphology. It w i l l b e t h e pur-
pose of t h e f o l l o w i n g c h a p t e r t o i n v e s t i g a t e i n which way S a u s s u r e ' s i d e a s
d i f f e r from t h o s e of P a u l and Kruszewski and how they r e l a t e t o t h e r e s t
of S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r y .
2.2.4.2 Saussure's Suggestions concerning t h e Systematic
I

Nature o f Language

IZ e s t essentieZ de noter que Zrana-

Zyse de Za Zangue peut reposer sur
un rapport appment des fomes, sur
un rapport qui n ' e s t pas j u s t i f i 6
par Z r6tymoZogie, crest-&dire p a r
Ze rapport p r i m i t i f de ces formes.
F. d e S a u s s u r e i n 1895
6

The i d e a of t h e s y s t e m a t i c n a t u r e of language had occupied S a u s s u r e ' s

mind every s i n c e h e f i r s t v e n t u r e d , i n 1872 a s a boy of f i f t e e n , t o
c o n s t r u c t "un sysdme g&z&aZ du Zangage" (CFS 17: 1 7 ) c u l m i n a t i n g i n
t h e f o l l o w i n g f o r m u l a t i o n i n h i s Cours, which h a s i t s s o u r c e i n h i s l a s t
p e r i o d of l e c t u r e s on g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s i n 1911, and which h a s sub-
s e q u e n t l y become t h e c o r n e r s t o n e of S a u s s u r e ' s d o c t r i n e :

... l a langue e s t un systgme dont t o u s l e s termes s o n t

s o l i d a i r e s et o; l a v a l e u r d e l ' u n n e r g s u l t e que l a pr6-
sence simultange des a u t r e s ... (CLG, 159; c f . CLGCE),
259).

With t h e h e l p of S a u s s u r e ' s own p u b l i c a t i o n s a s w e l l a s s t u d e n t s ' n o t e s

t a k e n from h i s c o u r s e s between 1893 and 1911 and autograph m a n u s c r i p t s
a n a l y z e d and p a r t l y p u b l i s h e d by Godel, i t i s p o s s i b l e t o t r a c e t h e
e v o l u t i o n of S a u s s u r e ' s concept of s y s t e m i n language. In contrast t o
t h i s t h e r e a r e no s i m i l a r i n d i c a t i o n s t o b e found w i t h r e g a r d t o Saus-
s u r e ' s i d e a s about t h e " r a p p o r t s syntagmatiques e t a s s o c i a t i f s " pro-
pounded a t l e n g t h i n t h e Cours ( c f . CLG, 170-80, 187-9 2 [passim]) .
A s a m a t t e r of f a c t n e i t h e r Godel's Sources mnuscrites nor t h e c r i t i c a l
e d i t i o n t u r n up a n y t h i n g from S a u s s u r e ' s own pen r e l a t i n g t o t h i s d i s -
t i n c t i o n , n o t even n o t e s p e r t a i n i n g t o h i s c o u r s e s of 1907-11. It i s
t h e r e f o r e almost i m p o s s i b l e t o s a y a n y t h i n g about t h e p r o g r e s s i o n of
S a u s s u r e ' s argument. However, owing t o h i s probably un-matched acquain-
t a n c e w i t h S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r y and h i s i n s i g h t i n t o t h e p a r t i c u l a r development
 of i t s s p e c i f i c i n g r e d i e n t s , Godel h a s provided u s w i t h two t e x t s i n
o r d e r t o g i v e "a more v i v i d i d e a ' o f d e S a u s s u r e ' s l e c t u r e s " which, though
o v e r 15 y e a r s a p a r t , p e r m i t u s t o draw some t e n t a t i v e c o n c l u s i o n s . In
t h e Geneva S c h o o l Reader of 1969, Godel p r e s e n t s e x c e r p t s from a n a u t o -
graph m a n u s c r i p t d a t i n g back t o l e c t u r e s on (Greek) morphology g i v e n
d u r i n g t h e academic y e a r 1894195 ( c f . SM, 3 6 ) , and a r e c o n s t r u c t i o n
o f t h e l a s t l e c t u r e s of S a u s s u r e ' s t h i r d c o u r s e i n g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s
g i v e n i n June and J u l y 1911 on t h e b a s i s of s t u d e n t s ' n o t e s .
7

To a c e r t a i n e x t e n t i t c a n b e s a i d t h a t S a u s s u r e ' s l e c t u r e s on
morphology i n l a t e 1894 r e f l e c t a number of h i s i d e a s i n s t a t u n a s c e n d i .
8
I n o r d e r t o d i s t i n g u i s h between phonology and morphology a s h a v i n g
d i f f e r e n t purposes w i t h i n l i n g u i s t i c i n v e s t i g a t i o n , S a u s s u r e s e t up t h e
p r i n c i p l e t h a t w i t h t h e former one h a s t o c o n s i d e r "une mGme forme a
d e s d a t e s d i v e r s e s " ( i . e . d i a c h r o n i c a x i s ) whereas w i t h t h e l a t t e r one
h a s t o s t u d y "des formes d i v e r s e s a' une mGme d a t e " ( i . e . s y n c h r o n i c a x i s )
(Reader, 27). I n t h i s c o n t e x t S a u s s u r e e x c l u d e s etymology by v i r t u e of
t h e f a c t t h a t i t does n o t r e p r e s e n t "un o r d r e dgtermin; de recherches"
n o r a s p e c i f i c o r d e r i n g of l i n g u i s t i c f a c t s and t h a t i t s a c t i v i t y made
u s e of b o t h phonology and morphology, s o t h a t one may i n f e r t h a t h e
regarded t h i s b r a n c h of language s t u d y n o t t o b e a n e s s e n t i a l p a r t of
l i n g u i s t i c s c i e n c e ( c f . op. c i t . , 2 8 ) . S a u s s u r e ' s d e f i n i t i o n of morphology
i n t h e subsequent paragraph however i s q u i t e r e v e a l i n g : "Le v r a i nom
d e l a morphologie s e r a i t : l a t h g o r i e des s i g n e s , e t non d e s formes."
p. (Loc,cit.; our i t a l i c s ) . S a u s s u r e e x p l a i n s t h a t i n m o r p h o l o g y one
h a s t o c o n s i d e r , compare and a n a l y z e s i g n s which b e l o n g t o t h e same
system and c l a i m s , a f t e r h a v i n g s t a t e d t h a t - t h e s p e a k e r i s c o n s c i o u s
of t h e sound a s a s i g n o n l y ( S a u s s u r e ' s r e f e r e n c e t o t h e c o n s c i o u s n e s s
of t h e s p e a k e r i s n o t a m a r g i n a l remark):

Mieux: 6 0 ~ 6 0consid&$ p a r r a p p o r t 2 s e s contemporains, e s t

l e p o r t e u r d'une c e r t a i n e i d g e , q u i n ' e s t p a s c e l l e de G O T ~ P ,
q u i n ' e s t pas c e l l e d e Gwoo, 6 0 ~ e6 t ~d e m z m e l e s p a r t i e s d e
6 0 ~ 6 0 . I1 apparaTt donc i c i comme s i g n e , e t r e l s v e d e l a
morphologie. (Reader, 2 8 ) .
S a u s s u r e adds t h a t t h e r e l a t i o n between t h e s e "f o m e s contemporaines I f
c o u l d n o t b e e l u c i d a t e d from t h e ' p o i n t of view of h i s t o r i c a l phonology.
I n h i s o u t l i n e of how morphological a n a l y s i s should b e conducted, h e
f i r s t c r i t i c i z e s t h e neogrammarian view t h a t r o o t , theme, s u f f i x , e t c .
were n o t h i n g b u t p u r e abstraction^.^ H i s argument i s t h a t "dans t o u t
&at de l a n g u e , l e s s u j e t s p a r l a n t s o n t c o n s c i e n c e d ' u n i t & morphologiques ",
i.e. t h e y a r e aware of meaningful u n i t s s m a l l e r t h a n t h e word (Reader, 3 0 ) ,
a c l a i m which h e t r i e s t o s u b s t a n t i a t e i n t h e f o l l o w i n g manner: 1)
The Frenchman i s conscious of t h e f a c t t h a t a n element s u c h a s - e m , in
c e r t a i n combinations, s e r v e s t o i n d i c a t e t h e c r e a t o r of a n a c t i o n , e.g.
graveur, penseur, p o r t e u r . 2) The r e a l i t y of t h i s element c a n b e demon-
s t r a t e d i n t h e c a s e of neologisms, e . g. 0s-em, recommenc-em, etc.,
(which f o l l o w t h e p r i n c i p l e of a n a l o g y ) . 3) Along w i t h p e n s e u r t h e
French language p o s s e s s e s t h e form p e n s i f , a f a c t from which two con-
c l u s i o n s may b e drawn: a ) pens- c o n s t i t u t e s a n " u n i t 6 s i g n i f i c a t i v e "
( f o r t h e same r e a s o n a s - e m ) , and b ) -if can b e r e c o g n i z e d a s a meaning-
f u l element by i t s e l f (though w i t h s l i g h t l y l e s s c e r t a i n t y a s i n t h e
c a s e of - e m ) . S a u s s u r e concludes t h a t morphological a n a l y s i s performed
by t h e grammarian, i n a s much a s i t i s i n agreement w i t h t h e s e f a c t s ,
10
cannot b e regarded a s d e a l i n g w i t h a p r o d u c t of a b s t r a c t i o n .
S a u s s u r e ' s i n s i s t a n c e on t h e f a c t t h a t t h e l i n g u i s t d e a l s w i t h
r e a Z i a i s c e r t a i n l y worth n o t i n g s i n c e h e n e v e r abandoned t h i s i d e a
( c f . LTS, 4 3 ) , a t times t o t h e dismay of 20th-century t h e o r i s t s .
But what i s more i m p o r t a n t i s S a u s s u r e f s d e m o n s t r a t i o n of how ( h e b e l i e v e s )
t h e human mind o p e r a t e s , namely n o t by combining os- and - e m i n o r d e r
t o form o s e m b u t i n t h e f o l l o w i n g manner:
g r a v e m : g r a v e r : j e grave = x : o s e r : j ' o s e .
I n o t h e r words, t h e s p e a k e r forms a new word by a s p e c i f i c kind of ana-
l o g i c a l p r o c e d u r e which r e s u l t s , i n t h e p r e s e n t example, i n t h e c r e a t i o n
11
of t h e word o s e u r .
The o t h e r a s p e c t of morphology which d e s e r v e s t o b e r e t a i n e d i s
S a u s s u r e ' s d e f i n i t i o n of i t a s t h e t h e o r y of s i g n s , n o t merely of forms
b u t meaningful forms, a l t h o u g h h e p o i n t s o u t t h a t t h e a n a l y s i s can b e
b a s e d on a n a p p a r e n t r e l a t i o n of forms ( c f . q u o t a t i o n a t t h e b e g i n n i n g
of 2.2.4.2). I n h i s second c o u r k e (190819) when S a u s s u r e c r i t i c i z e d
t h e t r a d i t i o n a l s u b d i v i s i o n of l i n g u i s t i c s t u d y i n t o morphology, s y n t a x ,
and l e x i c o l o g y , t h i s a s p e c t r e c e i v e d i t s p r o p e r p l a c e when h e d e f i n e d
what h e u n d e r s t a n d s by "grammar", a d e f i n i t i o n which h e seems t o h a v e
i l l u s t r a t e d by t h e f o l l o w i n g e q u a t i o n :

Grammatical = s i g n i f i c a t i f = r e s o r t i s s a n t 2 un s y s t s m e d e
s i g n e s = synchronique i p s o facto ( s . CLG(E) , 304) .
I n o t h e r words, S a u s s u r e r e c o g n i z e d t h e e x i s t e n c e of grammar o n l y on t h e
h o r i z o n t a l l i n e of synchrony, b e c a u s e a system of s i g n s , i . e . a meaningful
arrangement of l i n g u i s t i c elements, can only b e d e t e c t e d w i t h i n a language
state. Moreover, t h i s view e n t a i l e d t h e r e j e c t i o n of t h e t r a d i t i o n a l
d i v i s i o n between s y n t a x and morphology a s w e l l a s t h e s e p a r a t e t r e a t m e n t
of l e x i c o l o g y . N e i t h e r morphology nor s y n t a x can b e a d e q u a t e l y t r e a t e d
w i t h o u t s e m a n t i c c o n s i d e r a t i o n s and i n d e e d t h e s e t h r e e approaches t o
l a n g u a g e a r e i n t e r r e l a t e d and t h e i r s e p a r a t i o n i s a r b i t r a r y and c o n t r a -
d i c t o r y t o t h e f a c t s of language.
T h e r e f o r e , S a u s s u r e proposed t h a t e v e r y t h i n g which makes up a
language s t a t e i s b a s e d , i n t h e f i n a l a n a l y s i s , on t h e t h e o r y of syntagms
and on t h e t h e o r y of a s s o c i a t i o n s ( c f . CLG(E) , 307). ( I t s h o u l d b e b o r n e
i n mind t h a t h e views t h e d i v i s i o n from t h e 'grammatical', i.e. 'syn-
chronic', angle.) The syntagm of which h e s a i d e a r l i e r ( c f . CLG(E), 306)
t h a t i t s r a n g e i s undetermined ( i . e . a syntagm could b e a s i m p l e word,
a compound o r a p h r a s e ) becomes t h e e n t i t y par exeeZZenee w i t h i n t h e
system of language. The s y n t a g m a t i c s S a u s s u r e e n v i s a g e s i s t o i n c l u d e
s y n t a x which r e q u i r e s t h e c o - e x i s t e n c e of a t l e a s t two u n i t s , s i n c e t h e
t h e o r y of t h e syntagm a c t u a l l y b e g i n s w i t h groups of two elements "dis-
t r i b u t e d i n space" (CLG(E) , 308).
Godel h a s r e c e n t l y p o i n t e d o u t t h a t t h e concept and t e r m of 'syntagm'
a r e n o t t h e r e s u l t of S a u s s u r e ' s r e f l e c t i o n s on s y n t a x b u t on t h e q u e s t i o n
of which f e a t u r e s make language a system.12 This would e x p l a i n S a u s s u r e ~ ' ~
emphasis on t h e s o l i d a r i t y b o t h of s y n t a g m a t i c and a s s o c i a t i v e r e l a t i o n s
( c f . CLG, 176 and 1 8 2 ) , r e l a t i o n s which t o g e t h e r account f o r t h e mechanism
of spiech ( s . CLG, 1 7 6 f f .) .I3 S a u s s u r e p o i n t s o u t t h a t " t o u t e s t r a p p o r t 1 '
i n language and t h a t t h e u n i t o f ) a word remains v a l i d , a t any g i v e n
moment, o n l y by v i r t u e of i t s o p p o s i t i o n w i t h o t h e r u n i t s ( c f . CLG(E),
276), and i n t h i s way s y n t a g m a t i c and a s s o c i a t i v e r e l a t i o n s each p l a y a
p a r t i c u l a r r61e. S a u s s u r e ' s d i s t i n c t i o n between t h e s e two t y p e s of
r e l a t i o n s h i p i n l i n g u i s t i c elements h a s been d i s c u s s e d earlier i n con-
n e c t i o n w i t h t h e t h e o r i e s of P a u l ( c f . 1.3.2.2.3) and Kruszewski ( c f .
1.3.3.3) ; f u r t h e r m o r e , t h e s e p r i n c i p l e s a r e w e l l known i n t h e l i n g u i s t i c
l i t e r a t u r e and t h e r e f o r e do n o t r e q u i r e f u r t h e r e x e m p l i f i c a t i o n .
I n c o n t r a s t t o t h i s generally accepted d i s t i n c t i o n (although i t s
i m p l i c a t i o n s h a v e n o t always b e e n w e l l u n d e r s t o o d ) , i t must b e s t r e s s e d
t h a t t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between r e l a t i o n s i n absentia and r e l a t i o n s i n
praesentia cannot b e i s o l a t e d from S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r y of l a n g u a g e as a
whole.14 Indeed t h e s e two p r i n c i p l e s a r e t h e p r e r e q u i s i t e f o r t h e
s y s t e m a t i c o r g a n i z a t i o n and f u n c t i o n i n g of language which i s d e f i n e d
as a system of c o - e x i s t i n g and m u t u a l l y dependent terms. Saussure
never e x p l i c i t l y c a l l e d t h e syntagm a s i g n (though i n d i r e c t l y a group
of s i g n s , c f . CLG, 177) b u t one may i n f e r ( a s h a s most r e c e n t l y been
done by Godel, CFS 25: 119 ; e a r l i e r by E. S o l l b e r g e r and H. F r e i ) from
15
S a u s s u r e ' s t e a c h i n g t h a t its n a t u r e i m p l i e s t h e concept of t h e s i g n .
Furthermore, t h e concept of t h e s i g n n o t o n l y i m p l i e s t h e union of
signifLe and signifiant (which a r e p a r a l l e l e d by t h e two a s p e c t s of
a s s o c i a t i v e and s y n t a g m a t i c r e l a t i o n s r e s p e c t i v e l y ) b u t a l s o t h e o b l i -
g a t i o n t o t a k e i n t o account t h e s p e c i f i c d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g f e a t u r e s of
t h e s e r e l a t i o n s which determine what S a u s s u r e termed t h e v a l u e of a
g i v e n i t e m ( c f . CLG, 1 5 8 f f .).I6 The u n d e r l y i n g p r i n c i p l e of S a u s s u r e ' s
famous s t a t e m e n t t h a t i n language t h e r e i s n o t h i n g b u t d i f f e r e n c e s
(CLG, 166)17 w i l l b e r e f e r r e d t o e x p l i c i t l y i n t h e concluding c h a p t e r
( c f . 2.3) a l t h o u g h we r e c o g n i z e t h a t t h i s c l a i m i s r e l e v a n t i n t h e
t r e a t m e n t of t h e v a r i o u s k i n d s of r e l a t i o n s h i p s i n language and t h e l i n -
g u i s t i c mechanisms r e s u l t i n g from them. Indeed t h e a s p e c t of t h e i n t e r -
r e l a t i o n s h i p of l i n g u i s t i c elements i s n o t o n l y a n o v e r a l l r e q u i r e m e n t
p r e s e n t i n language b u t i t h a s t o b e a n e s s e n t i a l p a r t of t h e t h e o r y of
language a s a whole.
 FOOTNOTES 2.2.4.112.2.4.2

C f . CLG, 40, 41, 42, and 263 ("organisme grammatical"). Students

a t t e n d i n g FdS's second c o u r s e noted: T i nous p r 6 f e r o n s , n e p a r l o n s
p a s d'organisme mais d e systame. Cela v a u t mieux e t r e v i e n t a u msme."
(CLG(E), 5 9 ) .

Cf. W. K. P e r c i v a l , "Nineteenth Century O r i g i n s of Twentieth

Century S t r u c t u r a l i s m " , P a p e r s from t h e F i f t h R e g i o n a l Meeting of t h e
Chicago L i n g u i s t i c S o c i e t y ed. by Robert I. Binnik, e t a l . (Chicago:
Dept. of L i n g u i s t i c s , Univ. of Chicago, 1969), 416-20, e s p . pp. 418f.
.
(on S c h l e i c h e r )

.
Cf GraurlWald, 1965: 114; T e l e g d i , 1967: 237; Lepschy, 1970: 34;
H e l b i g , 1970:17, 29, t o name o n l y a few.
4
See Brugmann, Kurze v e r g l e i c h e n d e Grammatik d e r indogermanischen
Sprachen ( S t r a s s b u r g : K. J. ~ r i i b n e r , 1904; r e p r . B e r l i n : W. d e G r u y t e r ,
l97O), p. v i i i , note: our i t a l i c s . Our a t t e n t i o n was drawn t o t h i s
p a s s a g e by P r o f . W. K. P e r c i v a l of Kansas Univ. (Up. c i t . , p. v i , n o t e
1 ) . We g i v e a complete r e f . of Wegener s i n c e h e f e l l i n t o o b l i v i o n soon
t h e r e a f t e r ( f o r a n e x c e p t i o n , c f . F i r t h i n PiL, 181-2, and F i r t h , 1968:
203, n o t e 30, where r e f . t o S i r A. H. G a r d i n e r ' s r e c o g n i t i o n of Wegener
i s made) .
P a u l (1909: lO8f. = 1880: 66f .) , and t h i s i s something which we
overlooked i n e a r l i e r d i s c u s s i o n ( c f . 1.3.2.2.3, and our a r t i c l e "Hermann
P a u l and Synchronic L i n g u i s t i c s " t o appear i n Lingua, v o l . 2 8 ) , a l s o
spoke of " s y n t a k t i s c h e Verb indungen" and " s y n t a k t i s c h e ~usammenfiigung",
i . e . s y n t a c t i c c o n n e c t i o n s and, t o u s e a modern term, c o n c a t e n a t i o n ,
b u t h e f a i l s t o s e e t h a t combinations such a s "das Haus meines V a t e r s "
c o n s t i t u t e q u i t e a d i f f e r e n t k i n d of grouping t h a n t h o s e h e e x e m p l i f i e d
by c o n t r a s t i n g "Knabe" and "Msdchen" o r " s t e r b e n " and "Tod", "gebe" :
"gab" = wsagev : 11s a g t e " , o r "singe" v s . "Gesang", e t c . ( P a u l , 1909:107f .) .
Again, i t may b e asked whether P a u l ' s l a c k of formal c l a r i t y d i d n o t
i n d u c e FdS n o t o n l y t o c r i t i c i z e him b u t t o e s t a b l i s h h i s own c o n t r a s t i v e
views, a s h e d i d on o t h e r o c c a s i o n s .

Quoted from Geneva S c h o o l Reader, p. 3 1 (1969).

Godel e n t i t l e d t h e e x t r a c t s 'Worphologie" (Geneva S c h o o l Reader,

26-38) and " L i n g u i s t i q u e s t a t i q u e : q u e l q u e s p r i n c i p e s ggngraux"

366
 .
(op. c i t , 39-52). We s h a l l u s e t h e a b b r e v i a t i o n Reader i n t h e p r e s e n t
d i s c u s s i o n t o r e f . t o Geneva SchpoZ Reader. .

FdS's u s e of "phon&ique" i n t h e s e n s e of " l ' i t u d e d e s 6 v o l u t i o n s

d e s sons" ( c f . CLG, 5 5 f . ) does n o t seem t o have been a i d i o s y n c r a s y of
FdS's. Henry Sweet (1845-1912) f o r example used t h e term "phonology"
i n t h e s e n s e of "phonetics" i n h i s 1877 P r e s i d e n t i a l a d d r e s s t o t h e
P h i l o l o g i c a l S o c i e t y and i n t h e p r e f a c e t o h i s N e u English Grmm of
1891; c f . t h e r e l e v a n t q u o t a t i o n s i n The Indispensable Foundation:
A Selection from the Writings of Henry Sweet ed. by ~ u ~ g n J. i e A . Hender-
s o n (London: Oxf o r d Univ. P r e s s , 1971), p. v i i . However, i n h i s History
of Lunguage (London: Temple, 1 9 0 0 ) , p. 12 ( c f . op. c i t . , p. 28) h e a p p e a r s
t o h a v e abandoned t h i s term n o t i n g i n 1911 t h a t t h e " o r i g i n a l l y synonymous
t e r m , 'phonology', i s now r e s t r i c t e d t o t h e h i s t o r y and t h e o r y of sound-
changes." (Op. k t . , 34).

FdS mentions no p a r t i c u l a r l i n g u i s t b u t i t may b e r e c a l l e d t h a t

B. Delbriick, i n h i s EinZeitung i n das Sprachstudiwn ( L e i p z i g : B r e i t k o p f
& H g r t e l , l88O), pp. 7 5 f . , 84, gOf., and elsewhere, denied t h e r e a l i t y
of s t e m s and r o o t s and a d m i t t e d o n l y t h e h e u r i s t i c v a l u e of t h e s e forms,
views which Kruszewski c r i t i c i z e d i n h i s &erk nauki o jazyke (Kazan:
T i p o g r a f i a Imperatorskago Univ., 1883), 6 f . ; c f . Kruszewski, 1884:298f.
(Note t h a t FdS owned a copy of Kruszewski, 1 8 8 4 f f . ) .

lo Note t h a t we have t r i e d t o p r e s e n t FdS's t r a i n of t h o u g h t s some-

what more f o r m a l l y and h a v e i n t r o d u c e d t h e numbering of t h e v a r i o u s
s t e p s i n h i s argument b u t hope n o t t o have d i s t o r t e d i t i n i t s e s s e n c e ;
.
cf Geneva Schoo 2 Reader, 30.

l1 I n a l a t e r s e c t i o n S a u s s u r e t r e a t s h i s t o r i c a l morphology when
h e i l l u s t r a t e s t h e change of grammatical forms a s s u b s t i t u t i o n f o r o l d
forms by newly c r e a t e d forms which have t h e i r s o u r c e i n analogy (though
o t h e r forms of decomposition and recompositon may b e envisaged; c f .
Reader 3 4 f f . , e s p . p. 37).

l2 Cf. Godel, "Questions concernant l e syntagme", CFS 25:115-31

(1969[1970]), a t p. 115.

l3 O f h i s t o r i c a l i n t e r e s t a t l e a s t i s t h e f a c t t h a t A. Marty wished
t o c a l l s y n t a x t h e t h e o r y which d e a l s w i t h combinations of s i g n s ; c f .
h i s %er den Ursprung der Sprache (Wiirzburg: A. S t u b e r , 1 8 7 5 ) , p. 107,
and Untersuchungen zur GrundZegung der AZZgemeinen G r m a t i k und Sprach-
philosophie ( H a l l e / S . : M. Niemeyer, lgO8), p. 532, n o t e .

l4Godel's c a r e f u l c o m p i l a t i o n of t h e l a s t few l e c t u r e s FdS gave

i n summer 1911 i s s i n g u l a r l y i n s t r u c t i v e f o r t h i s purpose; s . Geneva
School Reader, 39-52.
l5 CLG(E), 280, f o r example, r e v e a l s t h a t FdS spoke 1 ) of "un
r a p p o r t d e s i g n i f i a n t 2 s i g n i f i g W i n t h e c a s e of enseignement : armement :
rendement, and 2) of a n " a s s o c i a t i o n du s i g n i f i 6 " i n t h e c a s e of en-
seignement : instruction : apprentissage : Zducation,
l6 Rey (1970:42) q u o t e s a p a s s a g e from Douchet and N. ~ e a u z g e ' s
a r t i c l e on grammar i n t h e EncycZopedie ed. by D i d e r o t and dlAlembert,
where t h e a u t h o r s s t a t e : "La v a l e u r d e s mots c o n s i s t e dans l a t o t a l i t 6
des i d 6 e s que l ' u s a g e a a t t a c h 6 e s 2 chaque mot."

l7 Note t h a t ~ g g a l l i e rwrote: ' 1 2 n'y a dans l a Zangue ( b t a t de langue)

.
que des diff&ences " CLG(E) , 270) . .
Cf a l s o t h e n o t e s o f E. Cons t a n t i n
({bid.) which i n d i c a t e t h a t FdS s t r e s s e d a g a i n t h e s y n c h r o n i c v i e w p o i n t .
2.2.4.3 Post-Saussurean Developments o f t h e N a t u r e o f Language
as a System o f R e l a t i o n 6

M i t seiner Theorie von Syntagmatik und

Paradigmatik hob Saussure d i e t r a d i t i o -
neZZe AufteiZung der Grannnatik i n Mor-
phoZogie und Syntax auf und e r s e t z t e
s i e durch die Paradigmentheorie, die
die Beziehungen der sprachZichen Ein-
heiten auf der paradigmatischen Achse
untersucht, und die Syntagmatheorie,
d i e die Beziehung Zinguistischer Ein-
h e i t e n auf der syntagmatischen Achse
erforscht .
J u . D. Apresjan (1971:41)

A s i n p r e v i o u s i n s t a n c e s , e.g. t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between synchrony

and diachrony ( c f . 2.2.2.3) and t h e t h e o r y of s i g n s ( c f . 2.2.3.3),
S a u s s u r e ' s i d e a s about s y n t a g m a t i c and p a r a d i g m a t i c r e l a t i o n s h a v e n o t
b e e n developed t o t h e p o i n t where t h e y could b e i n c o r p o r a t e d i n t o a
g e n e r a l t h e o r y of language a n a l y s i s . This does n o t mean t h a t S a u s s u r e ' s
c o n c e p t s have have b e e n i g n o r e d by t h e m a j o r i t y of l i n g u i s t s ; indeed
t h e r e h a v e appeared d u r i n g t h e p a s t t h i r t y y e a r s some one hundred a r t i c l e s
1
and s t u d i e s devoted t o t h i s a s p e c t of S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r y . Curiously
enough, b o t h B a l l y and Sechehaye, who defended and p a r t l y developed h i s
p r i n c i p l e s f u r t h e r , do n o t seem t o h a v e e v e r v e n t u r e d t o d i r e c t t h e i r
a t t e n t i o n t o t h e s e components of S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r y of language which
i n o u r view a r e q u i t e i m p o r t a n t . 2 A s a m a t t e r of f a c t l i n g u i s t s h a v e
o n l y become aware of S a u s s u r e 's momentous s u g g e s t i o n s d u r i n g t h e l a s t
two decades o r s o and i n p a r t i c u l a r do n o t seem t o h a v e r e a l i z e d t h e impact
of S a u s s u r e ' s concept of t h e syntagm. D e s p i t e t h e e d i t o r s ' warning t h a t
s y n t a g m a t i c s s h o u l d n o t b e confused w i t h s y n t a x (CLG, 170, n o t e ) and
S a u s s u r e ' s argument t h a t t h e l a t t e r s h o u l d b e r e g a r d e d a s c o n s t i t u t i n g
only a p a r t of t h e former (CLG, l 8 8 ) , v e r y few s c h o l a r s h a v e s e r i o u s l y
c o n s i d e r e d t h i s d i s t i n c t i o n and, a s a r e s u l t , have i n t e r p r e t e d S a u s s u r e ' s
concept of t h e syntagm i n t h e s e n s e of p h r a s e 3 o r h a v e completelyabandoned
i t i n f a v o u r of morpheme, moneme, o r some o t h e r term. Even s o , i n 1968,
N. Chomsky, t h e most i n f l u e n t i a 1 , l i v i n g t h e o r i s t of language, could
denounce S a u s s u r e ' s d i s t i n c t i o n between s y n t a g m a t i c and p a r a d i g m a t i c
r e l a t i o n s by c l a i m i n g t h a t they were i n t r o d u c e d s o a s t o s e r v e as what
S a u s s u r e (and h i s f o l l o w e r s ) thought t o b e t h e o n l y p r o p e r methods of
l i n g u i s t i c a n a l y s i s , namely segmentation and c l a s s i f i c a t i o n . While
Chomsky i s e s s e n t i a l l y c o r r e c t i n s o f a r a s t h e l a s t p a r t of h i s c l a i m i s
concerned, h i s c o n t e n t i o n t h a t S a u s s u r e c r e a t e d t h e s e p r i n c i p l e s merely
f o r t h e purpose of language segmentation and c l a s s i f i c a t i o n and h i s
subsequent argument t h a t S a u s s u r e showed l i t t l e i n t e r e s t i n s y n t a x ( s .
Chomsky, 1968:17) r e v e a l s t h a t h e h a s n o t understood what S a u s s u r e meant
by syntagmatics. Moreover, Chomsky h a s chosen t o i g n o r e t h e f a c t t h a t
S a u s s u r e ' s p r i n c i p l e s of a n a l y s i s h a v e t o b e viewed w i t h i n t h e framework
of h i s a t t e m p t a t a s y n t h e s i s , an o v e r a l l t h e o r y of communication systems,
i.e. semiology . To c h a r a c t e r i z e S a u s s u r e I
p r o p o s a l s a s "taxonomic"
s
4
s u g g e s t s a mono-dimensional i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of h i s i d e a s .
However, t h i s misconception and m i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of S a u s s u r e ' s
i d e a s about s y n t a g m a t i c and a s s o c i a t i v e r e l a t i o n s i n language d a t e s
back a t l e a s t t o Hjelmslev's paper of 1936 r e a d on t h e o c c a s i o n of t h e
Fourth I n t e r n a t i o n a l Congress of L i n g u i s t s . I t was t h e r e t h a t H j e l m s l e v
s u g g e s t e d t h a t " a s s o c i a t i v e " b e r e p l a c e d by "paradigmatic" i n o r d e r t o
a v o i d S a u s s u r e ' s psychologism. This replacement of S a u s s u r e ' s o r i g i n a l
term may w e l l have c o n t r i b u t e d t o t h e f o r m a l i t y of H j e l m s l e v ' s s t a t e m e n t s
i n h i s ProZegomena ( c f . PTL, 8 4 f . ) and h a s c e r t a i n l y l e d t o a n over-
s i m p l i c a t i o n of t h e f a c t s of language; moreover, and t h i s i s of p a r t i c u l a r
concern i n t h e p r e s e n t c o n t e x t , i t h a s a l s o l e d t o a s e r i o u s d i s t o r t i o n
Q
of what S a u s s u r e had i n mind. If' may b e s a i d t h a t S a u s s u r e made a number
of concessions t o t h e paradigm of h i s own t i m e and allowed f o r more
p s y c h o l o g i c a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s i n h i s l i n g u i s t i c argument t h a n would appear
n e c e s s a r y i n t h e eyes of modern t h e o r i s t s of language.' We must n o t e
however t h a t h e c l e a r l y t r i e d t o f r e e h i s t h e o r y from p s y c h o l o g i c a l
n o t a t i o n s when, i n h i s l a s t c o u r s e , h e i n t r o d u c e d t h e p a i r s i g n i f i g /
s i g n i f i a n t t o r e p l a c e t h e terms "image a c o u s t i q u e " and "conceptt'.
In h i s c h a p t e r on s y n t a g m a t i c and a s s o c i a t i v e r e l a t i o n s , S a u s s u r e d i d
i n f a c t s p e a k of "paradigmes d e i l e x i o n " (CLG, 175) , 7 and t h e r e i s e v e r y
r e a s o n t o b e l i e v e t h a t h e would h a v e made s p e c i f i c u s e o f t h i s t e r m i f
he had t h o u g h t t h a t i t r e p r e s e n t e d a d e q u a t e l y t h e m e n t a l o p e r a t i o n s
u n d e r l y i n g speech. But S a u s s u r e d i d n o t do s o , a s t h e r e c e n t recon-
s t r u c t i o n of h i s l a s t l e c t u r e s r e v e a l . There h e r e f e r r e d t o coordination
syntagmatique o r t h e "sphsre d e s r a p p o r t s syntagmatiques" and coordination
associative. 8 For i n s t a n c e , S a u s s u r e n o t e d t h a t a word such a s enseigrulient
can b e l i n k e d t o t h r e e k i n d s of a s s o c i a t i v e s e r i e s : 1 ) w i t h enseigner,
enseignons, enseigne, e t c . ; 2) w i t h armement, rendement, e t c . , and 3)
w i t h i n s truetion, apprentissage, education, e t c . , and w e may assume t h a t
h e would h a v e a d m i t t e d t o a n o t h e r s e r i e s which a s s o c i a t e s enseignement
w i t h instructeur, &ole, apprendre, etc.' There can b e no doubt t h a t
t h e s e o b s e r v a t i o n s a r e much c l o s e r t o t h e a c t u a l f a c t s of language and
language p r o d u c t i o n t h a n t h e r a t h e r impoverished concept of p a r a d i g m a t i c
r e l a t i o n s , a concept which, r e g r e t t a b l y , h a s become g e n e r a l l y a c c e p t e d
a t t h e expense of t h e more p r o d u c t i v e i d e a of a s s o c i a t i o n .
We a r e a t p r e s e n t n o t a b l e t o e s t a b l i s h w i t h c e r t a i n t y whether J. R .
F i r t h ' s i d e a s about coZZocation and o r d e r e d s e r i e s ( c f . PiL, 196 and 228)
owe c e r t a i n i n s i g h t s t o ~ a us su r e . lo However, h i s "Synopsis of L i n g u i s t i c
Theory, 1930-55" p r e s e n t e d i n 1957 does appear t o i n v i t e such a c o n j e c t u r e ,
i n p a r t i c u l a r s i n c e h i s s u g g e s t i o n s a b o u t coZZocation and coZZigation
appear i n t h e c o n t e x t of h i s f o r m u l a t i o n s concerning s y n t a g m a t i c and
p a r a d i g m a t i c r e l a t i o n s (cf . Firth, .
1968: 186, 200f. ) l1 I n c o n t r a s t t o
S a u s s u r e who made l i t t l e a c t u a l u s e of t h e term structure, l2 F i r t h took
up t h e term a l o n g w i t h system i n o r d e r t o f o r m a l i z e t h e r e l a t i o n between
s y n t a g m a t i c and p a r a d i g m a t i c o r d e r i n g of l i n g u i s t i c elements: s t r u c t u r e s
pertain t o the ('horizontal') p a t t e r n i n g of s y n t a g m a t i c r e l a t i o n s , whereas
systems a r e ' v e r t i c a l ' and r e f e r t o p a r a d i g m a t i c r e l a t i o n s ( s . F i r t h ,
1968: 186; c f . a l s o Robins, 1967: 214). Q u i t e i n agreement w i t h S a u s s u r e ' s
views, F i r t h s t a t e s t h a t grammatical a n a l y s i s d e a l s w i t h b o t h k i n d s
.
of r e l a t i o n s , i.e. s t r u c t u r e s and s y s trms ( i b i d . ) l3 Although F i r t h
i s simply c o n t e n t w i t h examples of t y p i c a l c o l l o c a t i o n s of words (from
E n g l i s h ) , p o s t - F i r t h i a n developments show t h a t t h i s concept c a n b e
extended. Indeed F i r t h himself s u g g e s t e d t h e term s e t which might b e
used t o a c c o u n t f o r p a r a d i g m a t i c r e l a t i o n s i n c o n t r a s t t o ' o r d e r e d f
c o l l o c a t i o n s (cf . Firth, 1968: 180) .
I n h i s "Categories of t h e Theory of Grammar" of 1961, M. A . K.
H a l l i d a y gave a b r i e f o u t l i n e of t h e t h e o r e t i c a l p r e r e q u i s i t e s f o r a
t h e o r y of l e x i s (1961:273-7). S i n c e l e x i s , i n c o n t r a s t t o grammar,
r e p r e s e n t s a n open system o r a number of open systems, t h e t h e o r y of
l e x i s must p r o v i d e d i f f e r e n t c a t e g o r i e s f o r i t s d e s c r i p t i o n . Halliday
r e c o g n i z e s two fundamental c a t e g o r i e s which a r e n e c e s s a r y f o r t h i s
purpose: coZZocation and s e t . H e d e f i n e s them a s f o l l o w s : "Collocation,
l i k e s t r u c t u r e , a c c o u n t s f o r a s y n t a g m a t i c r e l a t i o n ; set l i k e c l a s s and
.
system, f o r a p a r a d i g m a t i c one. " (276) l 4 Another n e o - F i r t h i a n , John
McH. S i n c l a i r , i n a n a r t i c l e w r i t t e n i n 1966, s u g g e s t e d t h e u s e of t h e
t e r m coZZocation f o r t h e p r a c t i c a l i n v e s t i g a t i o n of l e x i s a r g u i n g t h a t
l e x i s " d e s c r i b e s t h e t e n d e n c i e s of i t e m s t o c o l l o c a t e w i t h each o t h e r " . 1 5
S i n c l a i r proposes a n i n v e s t i g a t i o n of f e a t u r e s such a s ' p r e f e r r e d s e -
quences', 'habitual interventions', and s i m i l a r k i n d s of c o n v e n t i o n a l
co-occurrences and a l s o t h e g e n e r a l s t r e n g t h s of c o l l o c a t i o n s , and h e i s
c o n f i d e n t t h a t s t a t i s t i c a l t e s t s and computation w i l l r e s o l v e many of
t h e q u e s t i o n s s u r r o u n d i n g t h e problem of meaning. This is n o t t h e p l a c e
t o e x p a t i a t e on t h e v a r i o u s i m p l i c a t i o n s of S i n c l a i r ' s s u g g e s t i o n s , b u t
i f our c l a i m c a n b e s u b s t a n t i a t e d t h a t t h e concept of c o l l o c a t i o n (and
c o l l i g a t i o n ) i s a d e r i v a t i v e of S a u s s u r e ' s i d e a s a b o u t s y n t a g m a t i c ( a s
w e l l a s a s s o c i a t i v e ) r e l a t i o n s , 1 6 we may r e f e r t o a t l e a s t one t r a i t of
F i r t h i a n l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y where S a u s s u r e ' s t e a c h i n g was e x p l o i t e d t o a
f r u i t f u l extent.
However, where a s y n t a g m a t i c t h e o r y i s concerned which f o l l o w s more
o b v i o u s l y a l o n g S a u s s u r e a n l i n e s , we have t o n o t e w i t h r e g r e t t h a t t h e
t h e o r i e s proposed s o f a r have n o t reached a wider a u d i e n c e , b u t h a v e
remained a s s o c i a t e d w i t h a p a r t i c u l a r l i n g u i s t o r r e s t r i c t e d group of
linguists. During t h e y e a r s 1947 t o 1962, f o r i n s t a n c e , t h e Czech R . F.
~ i k u zp u b l i s h e d more t h a n a dozen a r t i c l e s and s t u d i e s o u t l i n i n g h i s
s y n t a g m a t i c s which h e claimed t o b e t r u l y saussurean.17 Indeed h e pole-
m i c i z e d a g a i n s t t h e Swiss H. F r e i whom Mourelle-Lema (1969:15) c a l l e d
" t h e most orthodox" of t h e Genevan l i n g u i s t s and who, i n 1948, s u g g e s t e d
p r o c e d u r e s o f s y n t a g m a t i c a n a l y s i s which h e developed i n t h e s u b s e q u e n t
y e a r s .I8 D e s p i t e t h e f a c t t h a t h e p r e s e n t e d h i s i d e a s i n v a r i o u s p l a c e s
w
and languages, Mikus's s u g g e s t i o n s d i d n o t a t t a i n r e c o g n i t i o n , p a r t l y
b e c a u s e of h i s p r e o c c u p a t i o n w i t h s y n t a g m a t i c s t r i n g s below t h e l e v e l
of a p h r a s e and p a r t l y b e c a u s e of t h e polemic t o n e w i t h which h e a t t a c k e d
t h e t h e o r i e s of o t h e r s , n o t a b l y F r e i and T e s n i s r e . But whereas ~ i k u g
h a s been s h a r p l y c r i t i c i z e d and h a s f a l l e n i n t o oblivion,19 F r e i ' s pro-
p o s a l s , perhaps owing t o t h e u p s u r g e of i n t e r e s t i n t r a n s f o r m a t i o n a l -
20
g e n e r a t i v e grammar, h a v e n o t r e c e i v e d t h e a t t e n t i o n t h e y d e s e r v e .
The posthumously p u b l i s h e d work of t h e l a t e Lucien T e s n i 2 r e (1893-
1954) f i r s t appeared t o s h a r e t h e f a t e of F r e i and o t h e r s when it w a s
p u b l i s h e d i n 1959, two y e a r s a f t e r Chomsky's Syntactic S t r u c t w e s .
~ e s n i & e t o o k up a number of Saussurean i d e a s , i n p a r t i c u l a r what h e
21
c a l l e d t h e "antinomie d e l ' o r d r e s t r u c t u r a l e t d e l ' o r d r e l i n 6 a i r e 1 ' .
However, d e s p i t e t h e s i z e of t h e book and t h e u n u s u a l manner of g r a p h i c
p r e s e n t a t i o n , T e s n i z r e ' s ~Z$rn&ts de syntaxe structwaZe h a s r e c e i v e d
22
more and more a t t e n t i o n i n r e c e n t y e a r s , b o t h i n Europe and i n America.
I n 1965, when Chomsky's Aspects appeared, a second e d i t i o n of T e s n i z r e ' s
work w a s p u b l i s h e d , an i n t e r e s t i n g c o i n c i d e n c e perhaps. 23 Because of
t h e growing d i f f i c u l t i e s t r a n s f o r m a t i o n a l - g e n e r a t i v e grammar h a s had t o
f a c e i n i t s a t t e m p t t o s o l v e t h e problem of s e m a n t i c s t a t e m e n t s p r o v i d i n g
t h e b a s e of t h e language under i n v e s t i g a t i o n , T e s n i s r e ' s i d e a s h a v e b e e n
r e c e i v i n g growing a t t e n t i o n i n r e c e n t y e a r s . 24 P. Guiraud h a s r e c e n t l y
n o t e d s i m i l a r i t i e s between t r a n s f o r m a t i o n a l grammar and Tesni'ere's depen-
dency grammar, a s i t h a s been termed, 25 and a t t e m p t s have been made t o
f u s e t h e s e two t h e o r i e s . 26 However, i t may w e l l b e t h a t ~ e s n i ' e r e ' s
a n a l y s e s of s e n t e n c e s i n a post-Saussurean manner w i t h e x p l i c i t s t a t e -
ments of t h e v a r i o u s reZations of t h e i n d i v i d u a l elements w i t h i n a g i v e n
s y n t a c t i c s t r i n g c o u l d l e a d towards a b e t t e r u n d e r s t a n d i n g of t h e o p e r a t i o n
of language and t h u s mark an i m p o r t a n t e x p l o i t a t i o n of i d e a s proposed by
S a u s s u r e more t h a n two g e n e r a t i o n s ago.
 We have been a b l e t o p o i n t o n l y t o c e r t a i n f r u i t f u l developments
which might b e taken t o imply t h a t a r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n of t h e s e and o t h e r
s u g g e s t i o n s made by Saussure could produce s i m i l a r l y p r o d u c t i v e r e s u l t s .
 1

FOOTNOTES - 2.2.4.3

.
Cf E. F. K. Koerner , Bib l i o g r a p h i a Saussrneana, 1870-1970,
P a r t I, S e c t i o n 4. ( d ) , Nos. 1008-1139.

S. Geneva School Reader, pp. 8-10 and 21-2 ( n o t e s ) , f o r a l i s t

of ally's w r i t i n g s , and pp. 10-11 and 22-3 ( n o t e s ) , f o r a l i s t of
Sechehaye's p u b l i c a t i o n s .

~ e 'sy (19 70: 107) t r a n s l . of Bloomf i e l d 's "phrase" (RiL I, 27)

b y F r . "syntagme" i s q u i t e m i s l e a d i n g ; i n FdS's u n d e r s t a n d i n g of t h e
t e r m syntagm could mean o n l y l i n e a r combination of two o r more meaning-
f u l units.

It is t r u e t h a t FdS n e v e r spoke e x p l i c i t l y of "deep s t r u c t u r e "

.
whatever i s i m p l i e d b y t h i s term ( c f Chomsky , Deep S t r u c t u r e , Surfcce
S t r u c t u r e , and Semantic I n t e r p r e t a t i o n [Bloomington, Ind.: reproduced
by I n d i a n a Univ. L i n g u i s t i c s Club, 19691, f o r one of h i s most r e c e n t
s t a t e m e n t s on t h i s t o p i c ) ; i n c i d e n t a l l y FdS made t h e f o l l o w i n g s t a t e -
ment about t h e concept of z e r o w i t h i n a syntagm: I n a "syntagme" t h e
m n I have s e e n " l e que e s t 6 g a l 2 zgro", however "il y a t o u j o u r s l e
s i g n e c o n c r e t 2 l a b a s e , mzme quand l e s i g n e a r r i v e a ztre z6r01' ( s .
SM, 281 [ ' z & o ' ] ) .

Cf. L. Hjelmslev, "Essai d ' u n e t h g o r i e d e s morph&nes", A[4]CIL,

140-51; r e p r . i n TCLC 12:152-64 ( l 9 5 9 ) , a t p. 152, n o t e 3.
6
F o r a n o p p o s i t e view, c f . Chomsky, 1968:24, 84, and elsewhere.

' CLG(E), 289, however, s u p p l i e s no s o u r c e f o r t h i s t e r m ; FdS, on

h i s p a r t , employed t h e t e r m "paradigme" v e r y f r e q u e n t l y i n h i s p a p e r ,
11
.
A c c e n t u a t i o n l i t u a n i e n n e " , IFAnz 6: 157-66 (189 6 ) ; r e p r i n R e c u e i l ,
526-38, i n a s e n s e similar t o F i r t h ' s u s e of t h e term i n p r o s o d i c a n a l y s i s
( c f . PiL, 1 2 8 ) .

Cf . Geneva S c h o o l Reader, 39 f .
9
S. op. c i t . , 4Of. ; c f . CLG(E), 280.

lo F i r t h ' s a c q u a i n t a n c e w i t h FdS I s d o c t r i n e c a n b e i n f e r r e d from

h i s f r e q u e n t r e f e r e n c e s t o t h e Corns (and t h e p r i n c i p l e s h e r e j e c t s ) ;
c f . PiL 2, 8 , 1 6 , 1 7 , 71, 121, 143, 144, 167, 179-81, 183, 186, 190
( n o t e ) , 217, 218, 227, and elsewhere; c f . a l s o F i r t h , 1968:127-9.
 l1 We s u s p e c t t h a t F i r t h ' s t e c h n i c a l u s e of e x p r e s s i o n s such a s
~ y s t e m , term, sequence, vaZue, i,n a d d i t i o n t o paradigmatic and syntag-
matic, i s q u i t e "post-Saussurean"; unity and i d e n t i t y ( c f . F i r t h , 1968:
200) c o u l d perhaps b e added t o t h e l i s t .

l2 Cf. CLG, 180 ( " s t r u c t u r e du mot"), 256 ( " c e r t a i n e s r s g l e s d e

s t r u c t u r e [ c o n c e r n i n g t h e s y l l a b l e ] " ) , and 244 where t h e term i s r e j e c t e d
.
as m i s l e a d i n g , t o g e t h e r w i t h t h a t of " c o n s t r u c t i o n " ( c f CLG(E) , 405).

l3R. A. ~ u d s o n ' s r e c e n t s t a t e m e n t s r e g a r d i n g t h e views of FdS and

Hjelmslev on t h e one hand, and F i r t h on t h e o t h e r have t o b e q u e s t i o n e d ;
FdS d i d n o t c l a i m t h a t "paradigmatic r e l a t i o n s a r e a t l e a s t independent
o f , and probably l o g i c a l p r i o r t o , s y n t a g m a t i c r e l a t i o n s . " Cf. Hudson's
a r t i c l e s i n EncycZopaedia of Linguistics, 273-80 (1969), a t p. 276.

l4H a l l i d a y h a s pursued h i s i d e a s f u r t h e r ; c f . h i s p a p e r s , "Class i n

R e l a t i o n t o t h e Axes of Chain and Choice i n Language", Linguistics 2:5-15
(1963). Note t h a t H a l l i d a y s t a t e s ( p . 5, n o t e ) t h a t t h e s e two terms
h a v e b e e n used " i n p l a c e of t h e i r l e s s s e l f - e x p l a n a t o r y e q u i v a l e n t s
' s y n t a g m a t i c a x i s ' and ' p a r a d i g m a t i c a x i s ' , " and "Lexis a s a L i n g u i s t i c
Level", i n Memory of J . R. Firth ed. by C. E. B a z e l l , e t a l . (London:
Longmans, 1 9 6 6 ) , 148-62.

l5 Cf . J. McH. S i n c l a i r , "Beginning t h e Study of Lexis", I n Memory

of J . R. Firth, e t c . , 410-30, a t p. 411.

l6A s F i r t h argued (and FdS n e v e r d e n i e d i t ) 3. Lyons (1968: 74ff .)

p o i n t s o u t t h e i n t e r d e p e n d e n c e of p a r a d i g m a t i c and s y n t a g m a t i c r e l a t i o n s .

l7 For a l i s t of ~ i k u z ' sp u b l i c a t i o n s on t h i s t o p i c , s . BibZiographia

Saussureana, 1870-1970, Nos. 1080-94.
l8 For a d e t a i l e d a c c o u n t of F r e i ' s work i n t h i s a r e a , s. Ren6
Amacker, " ~ as i n t a g m a t i c a s a u s s u r i a n a d i Henri F r e i " , La ~ i n t a s s i :Atti
deZ I i I convego internazionaZe d i Studi deZZa Societa d i Linguistics
ItaZiana (Rome: M. B u l z o n i ) , 45-111.
l9 Cf. E. A. S e d e l ' n i k o v ' s c r i t i c i s m s of ~ i k u zi n VJa 7.4:51-4
( l 9 5 8 ) , and i n VJn 10.1: 73-82 (1961). F r e i ' s f i r s t a r t i c l e on t h i s
t o p i c a p p e a r s t o have b e e n h i s "Note s u r l ' a n a l y s e d e s syntagmes", Word
4:65-70 (1948); ~ i k u z ' sa t t a c k on F r e i appeared i n L-ingua 3:430-70
(1953) .
20
A. M a r t i n e t h a s t r i e d i n r e c e n t y e a r s t o propose p r i n c i p l e s of
s y n t a c t i c a n a l y s i s ; t h e s u c c e s s of h i s s u g g e s t i o n s h a s s o f a r been q u i t e
l i m i t e d . Major p o r t i o n s of h i s i d e a s have been i n c l u d e d i n t h e f o l l o w i n g
two a r t i c l e s on s y n t a g m a t i c and p a r a d i g m a t i c r e l a t i o n s p u b l i s h e d i n
La Linguis tique: Oswald Ducrot , hahe he p a r l g e : l a syntagmatique" (25-34) ,
and "Choix du l o c u t e u r : l a paradigmatique" (35-45) by ~ e a n - ~ e nReimen. 6
 21 L. ~ e s n i s r e ,~ l g m e n t sde s y n t m e s t r u c t m a l e ed., w i t h a p r e f a c e ,
by J e a n Fourquet ( P a r i s : C. K l i n c k s i e c k , 1959); 2nd ed., 1965, x x v i +
670 pp., a t pp. l l f f . For an e x $ l i c i t r e f . t o FdS, s . p. 1 7 , n o t e .

22 Cf. R. H. Robins, " S y n t a c t i c Analysis", ArchL 13: 78-89 (1961) ;

r e p r . i n RiL 11, 386-95, f o r a n e a r l y a c c l a i m of T e s n i & e l s ~Zgments
i n Europe, and D . G. Hays's s t u d y , Grouping and Dependency !7'h.eories
(The Rand C o r p o r a t i o n , p. 1910; 1960), f o r a n e a r l y American a p p r e c i a t i o n
of ~ e s n i s r e ' swork.

23 Cf. K. Baumglrtner, "Spracherkl%xng m i t den M i t t e l n d e r Ab-

.
h & t g i g k e i t s s t r u k t u r l ' , BSI 5: 31-53 (1965)

24 Cf. S. S t a t i , 'b$pendence ' s i m p l e ' e t 'complexe' dans l a s t r u c -

t u r e d e l16nonc6", RRLing 13: 49-60 (1968) ; Helbig, 19 70: 198-215 [passim]
and Posner, 1970:524-7, w i t h f u r t h e r r e f e r e n c e s .

25 C f . P. Guiraud, "Lucien T e s n i s r e and T r a n s f o r m a t i o n a l Grammar",

Language Sciences (Bloomington, I n d . ) 15:l-6 (1971).

.
26 Cf J a n e J. Robinson, "A Dependency Based T r a n s f o r m a t i o n a l Gram-
mar", A [ l O ] C I L 11, 808-13 (1970).
2 . 3 Concluding Remarks on the Second Part of the Inquiry

VberaZZ sind heute seine [i.e. Saussure ' s ]

Scheidungen m i s c h e r ~"Zangue " und f'paroZe I r
(Sprache aZs System und gesprochene Redel,
zuischer statischer oder ftsynchronischern
und evozutiver oder "diachronischer ( d i e
EinzeZheiten h i s torisch a .Zeitender) Sprach-
wissenschaft, oder seine Lehre vom Wort a Zs
sprachZichem "Zeichen" und seiner WiZZkiix-
Zichkeit entueder aZZgemein anerkannt oder
Gegenstand weiterer BeiniPhungen.
Manu Leumann i n 1944
*

... i Z n l e s t pas n&essaire que Saussure

s o i t i n f a i ZZib Ze pour qu 'on Ze reconnaisse
cornme Ze p2re de Z u Zinguistique moderne.
Saussure a eu Ze grand mzrite - entre
autres - montrer Za vaZeur r e l a t i v e des
GZGments Zinguistiques; e t c e t t e uaZem
est dgcrite Ze plus compZZtement duns Za
phrase n5gZigZe: 'Ze m6canisme Zinguistiquz
t o u t e n t i e r rouZe sur des i d e n t i t & e t des
diff5rences. "
E r i c Buyssens i n 1952 (CFS 10: 50)

I n t h e l a s t paragraph of t h e c h a p t e r i n t r o d u c i n g t h e problems of
i n t e r p r e t i n g t h e Cours we have o u t l i n e d t h e t h r e e main g o a l s of t h e
second p a r t of t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n ( s . 2 . 1 ) . Following t h i s s t a t e m e n t
o u r expressed i n t e n t i o n s were t o t r e a t t h e most i n f l u e n t i a l components
of S a u s s u r e ' s g e n e r a l t h e o r y of language i n i n d i v i d u a l s e c t i o n s each
of them d i v i d e d i n t o t h r e e c h a p t e r s . The f i r s t c h a p t e r i n v e s t i g a t e d
a c t u a l o r p o t e n t i a l a n t e c e d e n t s of S a u s s u r e ' s l i n g u i s t i c p r i n c i p l e s
b o t h w i t h i n t h e f i e l d of language s t u d y and i n e x t r a - l i n g u i s t i c d i s c i -
p l i n e s , i n p a r t i c u l a r s o c i o l o g y , p h i l o s o p h y , and psychology. It was
our i n t e n t i o n t h a t t h i s c h a p t e r would l i n k t h e second p a r t of t h e s t u d y
c l o s e r t o t h e f i r s t s i n c e we were p a r t i c u l a r l y concerned about t h e
g e n e s i s of S a u s s u r e ' s i d e a s . However, a s w e have a l r e a d y shown i n t h e
 379

f i r s t p a r t of t h e i n q u i r y , our c l a i m h a s been, and we b e l i e v e t h a t w e

have been a b l e t o s u b s t a n t i a t e it, t h a t S a u s s u r e was i n no way directly
i n f l u e n c e d by any of t h e c o n c e p t s , p r i n c i p l e s o r t h e o r i e s o u t s i d e l i n -
g u i s t i c s proper. S a u s s u r e ' s d i s t i n c t i o n between langue and parole and
h i s f r e q u e n t r e f e r e n c e t o t h e s o c i a l n a t u r e of language, i t s development
and f u n c t i o n i n g , h a s been r e g a r d e d a s a c l e a r i n d i c a t i o n of Durkheim's
and p o s s i b l y a l s o T a r d e ' s i n f l u e n c e on him. While we r e j e c t e d t h i s
s u g g e s t i o n i n an e a r l i e r c h a p t e r ( c f . 1.2.1.1) referring instead t o
Whitney ( c f . 1.3.1) a s S a u s s u r e ' s prime s o u r c e of i n s p i r a t i o n , w e h a v e
set out o u r views c o n c e r n i n g S a u s s u r e ' s a l l e g e d " s o c i o l o g i s m " i n the
s e c t i o n d e a l i n g w i t h langue, parole, and Zangage ( c f . 2.2.1.2) admitting
t h a t a n i n d i r e c t i n f l u e n c e of Durkheimian i d e a s on S a u s s u r e through t h e
i n t e r m e d i a r y of M e i l l e t i s n e v e r t h e l e s s q u i t e l i k e l y . T h i s must i n no
way b e t a k e n as a s u g g e s t i o n t h a t S a u s s u r e developed h i s i d e a s about
t h e s e t h r e e a s p e c t s of language o n l y a f t e r h e had been exposed t o c u r r e n t
work i n s o c i o l o g y b u t i n d i c a t e s t h a t s o c i o l o g i c a l p r i n c i p l e s played a n
i m p o r t a n t p a r t i n s h a p i n g t h e i n t e l l e c t u a l paradigm of t h e l a t e 1 9 t h
and t h e e a r l y 20th c e n t u r i e s . I n t h e c a s e of S a u s s u r e ' s d i s t i n c t i o n
between h i s t o r i c a l and n o n - h i s t o r i c a l t r e a t m e n t s of language w e have
b e e n a b l e t o show s i m i l a r l y s t r i k i n g p a r a l l e l s between S a u s s u r e ' s argument
and i d e a s p u t forward i n works from philosophy and psychology which were
p u b l i s h e d i n t h e second h a l f of t h e 19 t h c e n t u r y ( c f . 2.2.2.1). Once
a g a i n , however, we b e l i e v e t o have found s u f f i c i e n t e v i d e n c e f o r our
c l a i m t h a t S a u s s u r e d i d n o t e x p l o i t t h e views propounded i n w r i t i n g s
o u t s i d e l i n g u i s t i c s t o any n o t i c e a b l e e x t e n t b u t t h a t h e i n s t e a d adopted
c e r t a i n n o t i o n s (which may have had t h e i r u l t i m a t e s o u r c e o u t s i d e l i n -
g u i s t i c s p r o p e r ) through l i n g u i s t i c p u b l i c a t i o n s , f o r example t h e s t u d i e s
by P a u l ( c f . 1.3.2.2.1) and Kruszewski ( c f . 1.3.3.3) who, f o r t h e i r p a r t ,
had made u s e of p s y c h o l o g i c a l and s o c i o l o g i c a l c r i t e r i a i n t h e i r t h e o r i e s .
A s i m i l a r , though l e s s c l e a r l y i n d i c a t e d , s i t u a t i o n p r e v a i l s i n t h e
c h a p t e r t r a c i n g t h e l i n e s of t r a d i t i o n enjoyed by t h e concept of t h e
language s i g n ( c f . 2.2.3.1), a l t h o u g h i t must b e conceded t h a t t h i s
concept a p p e a r s t o have had i t s s o u r c e i n t h e philosophy of language
r a t h e r t h a n i n 'normal' l i n g u i s t i c science. However, even h e r e a d i r e c t
l i n g u i s t i c s o u r c e of S a u s s u r e ' s i n s p i r a t i o n c a n b e named: Whitney 's
i n f l u e n t i a l works of 1867 and 1875 ( c f . 1.3.1). Where S a u s s u r e ' s d i s -
t i n c t i o n between a s s o c i a t i v e ( p a r a d i g m a t i c ) and s y n t a g m a t i c r e l a t i o n s
are concerned, w e h a v e a g a i n b e e n a b l e t o d e m o n s t r a t e h i s i n d e b t e d n e s s
t o t h e work o f P a u l , i n p a r t i c u l a r w i t h r e f e r e n c e t o t h e a x i s of a s s o -
c i a t i v e r e l a t i o n s , and a l s o of Kruszewski i n whose work b o t h c o n c e p t s
have c l e a r l y been a n t i c i p a t e d ( c f . 2.2.4.2). A l l t h e s e findings have
by no means b e e n b r o u g h t forward i n a n a t t e m p t t o minimize S a u s s u r e ' s
accomplishnents. Indeed o u r prime concern was t o d e l i n e a t e some of t h e
i d e a s which were ' i n t h e a i r ' d u r i n g S a u s s u r e ' s l i f e t i m e i n o r d e r t o
p r o v i d e a more a d e q u a t e b a s i s f o r a well-judged a p p r e c i a t i o n of h i s
p r o p o s a l s which may i n f a c t b e r e g a r d e d as r e v o l u t i o n a r y , i . e . paradigrr!
creating. It cannot b e s u f f i c i e n t l y s t r e s s e d t h a t t h e n a i v e c o n c e p t i o n
of S a u s s u r e as a k i n d of deus ex machina must b e completely abandoned,
n o t o n l y b e c a u s e a c c e p t a n c e of t h i s view would mean a complete d i s t o r t i o n
of t h e h i s t o r y of i d e a s and t h e development of l i n g u i s t i c t h o u g h t i n
p a r t i c u l a r b u t a l s o i n o r d e r t o s a v e S a u s s u r e from unwarranted a t t a c k s
from t h o s e who, i n a complete misunderstanding of t h e a c t u a l f a c t s of
t h e i n t e l l e c t u a l paradigm of a g i v e n p e r i o d , have t r i e d t o d i s c r e d i t
Saussure and t o s u g g e s t t h a t h e 'merely' picked up t h e i d e a s which o t h e r s
had developed b e f o r e him by p o i n t i n g t o a number of s c h o l a r s , b o t h i n s i d e
and o u t s i d e t h e f i e l d of l i n g u i s t i c s t u d i e s . On t h e o t h e r hand, and t h i s
we hope t o h a v e b e e n a b l e t o show t o a c e r t a i n e x t e n t i n each second
c h a p t e r of t h e f o u r c e n t r a l s e c t i o n s of t h e second p a r t , S a u s s u r e was
prepared t o e x p l o i t i d e a s p u t forward by h i s f e l l o w - l i n g u i s t s o r by
s c h o l a r s working i n o t h e r a r e a s of human c u r i o s i t y ; t h e terms ' z g r o '
and ' t e r m e ' , f o r example, h a v e b e e n d e r i v e d from mathematics, 'valeur'
from economics, and t h e concept of i d e n t i t y from philosophy, f o r i n s t a n c e .
The middle c h a p t e r s of each s e c t i o n a r e devoted t o t h e second
p r i n c i p a l o b j e c t of t h e i n q u i r y s e t o u t i n t h e second p a r t of t h i s s t u d y .
I n an i n t r o d u c t o r y c h a p t e r ( s . 2.1) w e o u t l i n e d t h e problems i n v o l v e d
i n a n a t t e m p t t o r e - e s t a b l i s h ~ a u s s u r e ' s o r i g i n a l views and t o t r a c e t h e
 381

p a r t i c u l a r manner i n which h i s / d e a s evolved d u r i n g h i s academic c a r e e r ,

p o s s i b l y a l s o d a t i n g back t o h i s ) a t t e m p t as a boy of 1 5 t o c o n s t r u c t
a u n i v e r s a l proto-language from which a l l e x i s t i n g languages have d e r i v e d .
These d i f f i c u l t i e s have t h e i r s o u r c e n o t o n l y i n t h e manner i n which
B a l l y and Sechehaye compiled t h e Corns, a l t h o u g h t h e f a c t t h a t t h e y
based t h e i r r e c o n s t r u c t i o n of S a u s s u r e ' s l e c t u r e s mainly on s t u d e n t s '
n o t e s ( n o t t h e i r own) and o n l y a l i m i t e d number of S a u s s u r e ' s own p a p e r s
c o v e r i n g t h e p e r i o d 1891-1911 may b e o f f e r e d i n m i t i g a t i o n , b u t a l s o
i n t h e s i m p l e f a c t t h a t S a u s s u r e never c o d i f i e d h i s views a t any t i m e
t o an e x t e n t which would p e r m i t u s t o e s t a b l i s h p a r t i c u l a r s t e p s i n t h e
development of h i s i d e a s . A t l e a s t t h i s impression w i l l p r e v a i l a s long
as many of t h e r e d i s c o v e r e d a u t o g r a p h manuscripts remain unpublished
'i and t h e d a t e of t h e i r compositionpestablished.
I n t h e s e c h a p t e r s however w e b e l i e v e we have been s u c c e s s f u l i n
our a t t e m p t t o s u g g e s t t h e manner i n which S a u s s u r e ' s i d e a s have t a k e n
s h a p e from h i s e a r l y w r i t i n g s i n t h e l a t e 1870s t o t h e l a s t l e c t u r e s
on g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s i n summer 1911. A t t h e same time we have a l s o
t r i e d t o show t h a t n o t a l l t h e p a r t i c u l a r i n g r e d i e n t s of S a u s s u r e ' s
l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y developed d u r i n g roughly t h e same time and i n a more
o r l e s s c l e a r l y d e l i n e a t e d form of l o g i c a l p r o g r e s s i o n . Quite t h e
c o n t r a r y was t h e c a s e and s u g g e s t i o n s of a l o g i c a l p r o g r e s s i o n d e r i v e d
from t h e i m p o s i t i o n of a n o r d e r r e s u l t i n g from a t t e m p t s t o a s s e s s h i s
t h e o r e t i c a l argument from a post-Saussurean a n g l e f a i l t o r e c o g n i z e
S a u s s u r e ' s p a r t i a l dependence on t h e v i s t a s of h i s own time. In fact
i t w i l l b e noted t h a t c o n t r a r y t o what t h e t h e o r i s t of today might
e x p e c t , S a u s s u r e developed h i s d i s t i n c t i o n between synchrony and d i a -
chrony much e a r l i e r , i n f a c t probably some twenty-f i v e y e a r s e a r l i e r ,
t h a n t h e one between Langue and p a r o l e . I t would b e u n f a i r , however,
t o a c c u s e S a u s s u r e of l a c k of c l a r i t y i n h i s argument, though i t is only
j u s t t o s t a t e t h a t h e developed h i s i d e a s i n i t i a l l y mainly i n o p p o s i t i o n
t o neogrammarian views about language and i t s s t u d y . I t was c e r t a i n l y
n o t easy f o r him t o f o r m u l a t e t h e s e i d e a s i n a l o g i c a l l y c o h e r e n t manner
s i n c e throughout h i s l i f e h e remained i n f l u e n c e d by t h e (neograrnmarian)
paradigm of which h e was a p a r t . Thus h e a p p e a r s t o have begun t o oppose
the neogrammarian views by a t t a c ' k i n g t h e i r c l a i m t h a t language c a n only
b e t r e a t e d s c i e n t i f i c a l l y from a n h i s t o r i c a l p o i n t of view, whereas
when h e t r i e d much l a t e r t o d e f i n e t h e proper o b j e c t of l i n g u i s t i c s and
t o s p e c i f y i n .which way language w a s t o b e regarded a s a system, a system
of s i g n s and, i n a more r i g o r o u s manner, a system of mutually r e l a t e d ,
i . e . i n t e r d e p e n d e n t , terms, S a u s s u r e r e a l i z e d t h e n e c e s s i t y f o r d i s t i n -
g u i s h i n g between language a s 1 ) a code agreed upon by a g i v e n s p e e c h
community and a s 2) t h e u n d e r l y i n g system which p e r m i t s each i n d i v i d u a l
member t o s p e a k and t o u n d e r s t a n d t h e language, on t h e one hand, w i t h t h e
i n d i v i d u a l speech a c t n o t n e c e s s a r i l y s u s c e p t i b l e t o s y s t e m a t i c a n a l y s i s
on t h e o t h e r .
We a l s o b e l i e v e t o h a v e shown t h a t i t i s somewhat e x a g g e r a t e d t o
a r g u e , a s Godel and Engler t e n d t o s u g g e s t (and i t i s from t h i s p o i n t
of view t h a t t h e i r c o m p i l a t i o n of a g l o s s a r y of Saussurean terms must
b e c r i t i c i z e d s i n c e i t f a i l s t o i n d i c a t e c l e a r l y t h e e v o l u t i o n of h i s
v i e w s ) , t h a t S a u s s u r e ' s i d e a s p u t forward i n h i s l e c t u r e s on g e n e r a l
l i n g u i s t i c s (1907-11) were e s s e n t i a l l y i d e n t i c a l w i t h t h o s e h e c h e r i s h e d
i n t h e 1890s. Indeed t h e r e a r e a t l e a s t two major arguments t o c o n t r a d i c t
such an o p i n i o n . F i r s t l y , a s w e have n o t e d on s e v e r a l o c c a s i o n s ( c f .
1.2, 1.3.2.1, and 1 . 4 ) , t h e r e was a t t h e b e g i n n i n g of t h i s c e n t u r y a n
i n c r e a s e d awareness of g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c problems ( c f . t h e works of
Croce [1902], V o s s l e r [1904], Finck [I9051 and a l s o of Wundt [ 1 9 0 0 f f . ] ,
D i t t r i c h [1903], and o t h e r s ) , a development which was r e c o g n i z e d n o t
o n l y by a neogrammarian such a s D e l b r k k i n t h e f o u r t h e d i t i o n of h i s
E i n Z e i t u n g of 1904 b u t a l s o b y Brugmann who h a s g e n e r a l l y been regarded
1
as t h e l e a d e r of t h e neogrammarian movement. Secondly, and t h i s i s
c e r t a i n l y no l e s s i m p o r t a n t , S a u s s u r e d i d i n f a c t i n t r o d u c e a number of
terms and d i s t i n c t i o n s which should l o g i c a l l y have been i n t r o d u c e d e i t h e r
b e f o r e t h e second ( c f . t h e Zangue/paroZe d i s t i n c t i o n ) o r even t h e t h i r d
(e. g. t h e p a i r s i g n i f i 6 / s i g n i f i a n t ) course. Indeed many i d e a s which
h e had envisaged i n t h e 1890s d i d n o t r e c e i v e a r i g o r o u s f o r m u l a t i o n
b e f o r e t h e s e l a s t two c o u r s e s .
 The t h i r d and l a s t c h a p t e r s of t h e f o u r c e n t r a l s e c t i o n s of t h e
i n q u i r y were devoted t o t h e d i s c u s s i o n of post-Saussurean developments
of what we b e l i e v e t o b e t h e most i n f l u e n t i a l components of S a u s s u r e ' s
t h e o r y : 1 ) t h e synchrony/diachrony d i s t i n c t i o n ; 2) t h e Zangue/paroZe
dichotomy; 3) t h e t h e o r y of t h e language s i g n , and 4) t h e rapports
syntagmatiques e t associatifs. A s i s w e l l known, S a u s s u r e ' s i n f l u e n c e
h a s b e e n l a r g e l y through a g i v e n s e t of terms which h a v e been i n t e r -
p r e t e d d i f f e r e n t l y by l i n g u i s t s r a t h e r t h a n by complete a c c e p t a n c e of
h i s t h e o r y by a g i v e n group of s c h o l a r s . T h i s f a c t h a s p e r m i t t e d and
indeed o b l i g e d u s t o t r a c e v a r i o u s post-Saussurean developments a l o n g
t h e s e l i n e s a s w e h a v e p o i n t e d o u t e a r l i e r ( c f . 0.0, and 2.2.4). Our
c o n s t a n t concern h a s b e e n , f o r t h e l a r g e r p a r t of o u r d i s c u s s i o n , t o
r e l a t e a g i v e n a s p e c t of S a u s s u r e ' s d o c t r i n e t o t h e rest of h i s t h e o r y ,
e.g. w e h a v e shown how t h e synchrony/diachrony d i s t i n c t i o n presupposes
t h e Zangue/paroZe dichotomy, and p r e s e n t e d f u r t h e r c o n c e p t s which a r e
of importance t o a g i v e n component, e.g. t h e concept of language s t a g e .
We recognized t h a t , even though we h a v e a t t e m p t e d r e p e a t e d l y t o
i n t e r r e l a t e a p a r t i c u l a r f e a t u r e of S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r y w i t h o t h e r a s p e c t s ,
w e have by no means covered a l l p a r t i c u l a r i n g r e d i e n t s of t h e Corns,
some of which a r e c e r t a i n l y no l e s s i n f l u e n t i a l t h a n t h o s e r e f e r r e d t o
above. W e h a v e had t o a n i t t h e troublesome d i s t i n c t i o n between form and
s u b s t a n c e , a d i s t i n c t i o n which was t o become very i m p o r t a n t f o r Hjelm-
s l e v ' s ProZegomena f o r i n s t a n c e ( c f . PTL, 23, 49f .,
76-8, e t c . ) , be-
2

c a u s e we r e g a r d t h i s t o b e a n e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l r a t h e r t h a n a l i n g u i s t i c
problem. There a r e a number of o t h e r c o n c e p t s p e r t a i n i n g t o S a u s s u r e ' s
u n d e r s t a n d i n g of l i n g u i s t i c mechanism which have n o t r e c e i v e d t h e a t t e n -
t i o n t h e o r i s t s of language might w e l l r e q u i r e , and indeed t h e main
r e a s o n f o r t h e i r n e g l e c t h a s been t h e n e c e s s i t y f o r l i m i t i n g t h e s i z e
of t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y . We a r e however convinced t h a t t h e f o u r a s p e c t s
of S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r y s e l e c t e d f o r o u r d i s c u s s i o n s u f f i c e t o i l l u s t r a t e
o u r argument. Indeed, i m p o r t a n t developments, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n phono-
l o g i c a l t h e o r y and r e s e a r c h , h a v e had t h e i r u l t i m a t e s o u r c e i n s t a t e m e n t s
such a s "duns Za Zangue i Z n'y a que des diffgrenees . . . sans termes
positifst' (CLG, 166) o r S a u s s u r e ' s c o n c e p t of o p p o s i t i o n (CLG, 167)
o r h i s remark t h a t h e could e n v i s a g e a s c i e n c e "qui prend pour p o i n t d e
d g p a r t les groupes b i n a i r e s " (CLG, 78) . 3 I n connection w i t h t h e s e c l a i m s
i t would have been i n t e r e s t i n g t o i n v e s t i g a t e t o what e x t e n t S a u s s u r e
might h a v e been i n f l u e n c e d by H e g e l ' s philosophy ( c f . 2.2.1.1), i n par-
t i c u l a r s i n c e S a u s s u r e r e f e r s q u i t e f r e q u e n t l y t o t h e concept of i d e n t i t y
i n h i s l i n g u i s t i c argument ( c f . CLG, 150f., 154, 249f.; s. a l s o SM,
4
136-41). The r e c e n t r e v i v a l of i n t e r e s t i n Hegelian philosophy among
French s t r u c t u r a l i s t s a p p e a r s t o s u p p o r t o u r impression t h a t t h e r e i s a
c e r t a i n a f f i n i t y between Hegel's i d e a s and Saussure 's l i n g u i s t i c t h o u g h t ,
a n i m p r e s s i o n which would r e q u i r e a thorough s t u d y of Hegel's philosophy
t o substantiate. Our p r e s e n t i n v e s t i g a t i o n , however, cannot b u t s u g g e s t
areas of f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h ( c f . 1.2.1) which may l e a d t o a more profound
and d e t a i l e d account of t h e p h i l o s o p h i c a l framework w i t h i n which s c h o l a r s
and s c i e n t i s t s worked d u r i n g t h e l a s t two o r t h r e e decades of t h e 1 9 t h
century.
We s t a t e d e a r l i e r (cf . end of 2.1) t h a t each of t h e i n d i v i d u a l
a s p e c t s of S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r y which we have d i s c u s s e d i n t h i s p a r t of t h e
s t u d y merits e x t e n s i v e t r e a t m e n t . Indeed S a u s s u r e ' s s u g g e s t i o n s a r e s o
i n t e r r e l a t e d w i t h t h e i n t e l l e c t u a l paradigm of h i s own t i m e ar.d c o n t a i n
s o many f r u i t f u l i d e a s t h a t each i n f l u e n t i a l concept needs t o b e a n a l y z e d
i n d e p t h b e f o r e a s y n t h e s i s of h i s p r o p o s a l s a s a whole can hope t o b e
successful. S a u s s u r e ' s famous s t a t e m e n t " c ' e s t l e p o i n t d e vue q u i c r 6 e
l'objet" (CLG, 23; c f . a l s o CLG, 38; CFS 22:57f., and elsewhere) n o t
o n l y i n d i c a t e s t h e n a t u r e of h i s p a r t i c u l a r way of approaching l i n g u i s t i c
problems b u t a l s o s e r v e s t o p o i n t t o t h e i n t r i n s i c mental c h a r a c t e r of
t h e o b j e c t of i n v e s t i g a t i o n as w e l l a s t h e n e c e s s a r y precedence of t h e o r e -
t i c a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s o v e r and above t h e a c t i v i t i e s of 'normal s c i e n c e ' ,
t o u s e a Kuhnian term. D e s p i t e t h e almost s k e t c h y t r e a t m e n t of t h e f o u r
p r i n c i p a l components of S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r y and t h e i r 20th-century develop-
ment, w e b e l i e v e t h a t t h e f o l l o w i n g g e n e r a l c o n c l u s i o n s can b e drawn
w i t h r e g a r d t o t h e e v o l u t i o n of t h e Saussurean paradigm: 1 ) For a number
of r e a s o n s , b o t h p o l i t i c a l and c u l t u r a l , S a u s s u r e ' s i d e a s d i d n o t become
t h e g e n e r a l p r o p e r t y of l i n g u i s t i c s c h o l a r s h i p u n t i l t h e l a t e 1950s,
and even t h e n t h e y were d i s c u s s e d a s a more o r less complete t h e o r y by
o n l y a comparatively s m a l l numb& of l i n g u i s t s ; 2) t h e m a j o r i t y of t h o s e
linguists who e v e n t u a l l y d i d v e n t u r e t o a n a l y z e Saussurean views con-
t e n t e d themselves w i t h e i t h e r p o i n t i n g t o i n a c c u r a c i e s o r a p p a r e n t con-
t r a d i c t i o n s i n t h e Coms and tended t o d i s c r e d i t S a u s s u r e ' s s u g g e s t i o n s
as a whole by c o n c e n t r a t i n g t h e i r c r i t i q u e on a p a r t i c u l a r i n g r e d i e n t
t h e y d i s l i k e d o r could n o t a c c e p t ; 3) i t i s r a t h e r s a f e t o s a y t h a t
t h e o r y h a s played o n l y a m a r g i n a l r $ l e i n t h e l i n g u i s t i c d i s c u s s i o n of
t h e post-Saussurean e r a ; m e t h o d o l o g i c a l p r o c e d u r e s have f r e q u e n t l y been
Illistaken f o r t h e o r y and some s c h o l a r s h a v e deluded themselves i n t o m i s -
t a k i n g t h e a t t a i n m e n t of a h i g h e r l e v e l of a b s t r a c t i o n f o r p u r e l y t h e o r e -
t i c a l work, and 4) even t h e o r i s t s of t h e s t a t u r e of Louis H j elmslev
who p r i d e d themselves on t h e i r t r u l y Saussurean approach t o language must
b e c r i t i c i z e d f o r h a v i n g f a i l e d t o d i s c u s s i m p o r t a n t p a r t s of t h e t h e o r y
propounded i n t h e Corns; t h e y t o o adopted t h o s e a s p e c t s which they found
a t t r a c t i v e and i n accordance w i t h t h e i r own preconceived i d e a s and d i s -
c a r d e d , o f t e n w i t h o u t a p p r o p r i a t e d i s c u s s i o n , many o t h e r i n g r e d i e n t s of
S a u s s u r e a n t h e o r y . We h a v e on o c c a s i o n ( c f . 2.2.1.3 and 2.2.4.3) referred
t o t h i s d e p l o r a b l e a t t i t u d e which we found v e r y obvious i n H j e l m s l e v ' s
ProZegomena and i n a number of h i s o t h e r p u b l i c a t i o n s , and we have drawn
a t t e n t i o n t o t h e s e shortcomings i n H j e l m s l e v ' s t h e o r y e s p e c i a l l y b e c a u s e
h e h a s come t o b e r e g a r d e d a s t h e s c h o l a r i n o u r c e n t u r y who h a s g i v e n
p r i o r i t y t o t h e o r y i n h i s l i n g u i s t i c work.
The second p a r t of t h e i n v e s t i g a t i o n h a s almost e x c l u s i v e l y been
concerned w i t h l i n g u i s t i c m a t t e r s . W e r e f e r r e d on o c c a s i o n ( c f . 2.2.3.3)
t o t h e f a c t t h a t p a r t i c u l a r a s p e c t s of S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r y have been adopted
and i n d e e d e x p l o i t e d by s c h o l a r s o u t s i d e l i n g u i s t i c s p r o p e r , v i z . the
'structuralist' components of t h e Cowls h a v e appealed t o a n t h r o p o l o g i s t s ,
r asu s s , t h e s e m i o l o g i c a l p r o p o s a l s and o t h e r
i n p a r t i c u l a r Claude ~-& it-
p r i n c i p l e s of S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r y h a v e found p a r t i s a n s i n t h e f i e l d s of
philosophy ( e . g . Merleau-Ponty) and l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m and t h e o r y (e.g.
Barthes). However, e x t r a - l i n g u i s t i c developments of t h e p e r i o d f o l l o w i n g
t h e p u b l i c a t i o n of t h e Corns a r e o n l y of m a r g i n a l v a l u e f o r t h e p r e s e n t
 purpose, though t h e y may b e a n i n d i c a t i o n of t h e f a r - r e a c h i n g e f f e c t s
Saussure's i d e a s have generated.' The e x p l i c i t g o a l of t h e second p a r t ,
i n p a r t i c u l a r t h e l a s t c h a p t e r s of each major s e c t i o n , h a s b e e n t o
a n a l y z e t h e d i f f u s i o n of S a u s s u r e a n i d e a s w i t h i n l i n g u i s t i c s . The more
g e n e r a l a c c e p t a n c e of what we may c a l l , i n accordance w i t h o u r second
u s e of t h e t e r m ( c f . 2 . 0 ) , t h e Saussurean h a s been d e l a y e d
b y p a r t i c u l a r c i r c u m s t a n c e s which we accounted f o r i n e a r l i e r d i s c u s s i o n
( c f . 2.1).
Even i f we t a k e t h e e x t e r n a l s i t u a t i o n i n Europe i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n ,
and t h i s may perhaps e x p l a i n some of t h e " v i c t o i r e r e t a r d g e l ' t h e Cours
6
. encountered, t h e f o l l o w i n g f a c t s remain: 1 ) Although t h e r e h a v e a l r e a d y
b e e n two g e n e r a t i o n s of l i n g u i s t s s i n c e t h e p u b l i c a t i o n of S a u s s u r e ' s
l e c t u r e s on g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c s , t h e promise i n h e r e n t i n t h e i d e a s l a i d
down i n t h e Cows h a s n o t y e t b e e n f u l f i l l e d , i . e . many of t h e s u g g e s t i o n s
p u t forward by S a u s s u r e h a v e n o t y e t been a d e q u a t e l y e x p l o i t e d , re-
i n t e r p r e t e d and developed t o conform w i t h o u r p r e s e n t s t a t e of knowledge;
2) S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r y h a s n o t b e e n t a k e n a s a whole b u t i n s t e a d only
c e r t a i n a s p e c t s , u s u a l l y i n complete d i s r e g a r d of t h e i r p a r t i c u l a r con-
t e x t , h a v e been e x p l o i t e d (which i s poor s c i e n c e ) , t h e Cours b e i n g r e g a r d e d
more a s a q u a r r y where anyone may p i c k up t h e s t o n e s which h e t h i n k s f i t
f o r h i s own e d i f i c e t h a n a s a n o v e r - a l l t h e o r y of language which h a s
nutatis m t a n d i s t o b e comprehended as a u n i t y ; 3) many l i n g u i s t s do
n o t appear t o h a v e r e a l i z e d y e t t h a t a ) i t i s t h e awareness of o n e ' s
own t h e o r e t i c a l framework and t h e r e c o g n i t i o n by t h e l i n g u i s t o f t h e
precedence of t h e o r y o v e r and above t h e engagement i n t h e p r a c t i c a l
s t u d y of language which p e r m i t s l i n g u i s t i c s t o b e r i g h t f u l l y c a l l e d
a s c i e n c e , and b ) t h a t i t i s t h e o b l i g a t i o n of t h e s c i e n t i s t t o engage
i n what T. S. Kuhn h a s termed "mopping-up o p e r a t i o n s 1 ' , i . e . i n working
o u t t h e t h e o r e t i c a l framework which S a u s s u r e o u t l i n e d ; 4) p r e s e n t
l i n g u i s t i c work s u g g e s t s a n i n c r e a s e of i n t e r e s t i n and a t t e n t i o n t o t h e
t h e o r e t i c a l a s p e c t s of language s t u d y , and t h e r e a r e some i n d i c a t i o n s t h a t
i m p o r t a n t components of S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r y a r e now.being t a c k l e d a g a i n , b u t
w i t h more t h e o r e t i c a l r i g o u r and a d e e p e r u n d e r s t a n d i n g of t h e COWS a s
a whole. Godel's Sources manuscrites, Engler's c r i t i c a l e d i t i o n of
t h e Cowls, and o t h e r p u b l i c a t i o n s by b o t h s c h o l a r s have provided t h e
b a s i s f o r a renewed and i n v i g o r a t e d attempt t o s o l v e t h e many remaining
problems put f o r t h i n Saussure's work and encouragement f o r t h e concerned
l i n g u i s t t o f a c e up t o t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of t h e s c i e n t i s t : t o c l e a r
up h i s own backyard and sharpen h i s t o o l s b e f o r e engaging i n t h e a c t i v i t i e s
of normal science.
 FOOTNOTES - 2.3

* M. Leumann, % e r A n t e i l d e r Schweiz am Ausbau d e r Sprachforschung",

Die Schweiz und d i e Forschung ed. by Walther Staub and Adolf Hinzen-
b e r g e r , v o l . I1 (Berne: A. Francke, 1944), 416-36, a t p. 433.

I n t h e p r e f a c e t o h i s Kmze vergleichende G r m a t i k der indoger-

manischen Sprachen ( S t r a s s b u r g : K . J. Triibner, 1904), Brugmann noted:
"Man w i r d s i c h ngmlich h i e r i m Lauf d e r J a h r e mehr und mehr urn Biicher
w i e H. P a u l ' s P r i n z i p i e n d e r S p r a c h g e s c h i c h t e , Ph. Wegener 's Grundfragen
d e s Sprachlebens und E. S i e v e r s ' Grundziige d e r Phonetik zu bekiimmern
g e l e r n t haben und s i e h t i n f o l g e davon u n s e r e auf d i e G e s c h i c h t e d e r
e i n z e l n e n Sprachen gehenden Arb e i t e n m i t anderen Augen an a l s b i s h e r " .
(vi, note 1 ) .

S. t h e f o l l o w i n g two i m p o r t a n t a r t i c l e s on t h i s t o p i c : F. H i n t z e ,
"Zum V e r h g l t n i s d e r s p r a c h l i c h e n 'Form' z u r 'Substanz "', SL, 3: 86-106
(1949) , and E l i Fischer-Jdrgensen, "Form and Substance i n Glossematics",
.
AL 10: 1-33. For f u r t h e r r e f . , s Bib Ziographia Sausszrxt?n*na, 1870-1970,
P a r t I, S e c t i o n 4. ( e ) .

C f . t h e s e c t i c n , " W r i t i n g s on F u r t h e r Notions of Saussurean O r i g i n ,

such a s Opposition i n Language, and t h e D i s t i n c t i v e , Negative, and
( p o s s i b l y ) Binary R e l a t i o n s b etween i t s Elements ' I , Bib Ziographia Saus-
smeana, l87O-l97O, Nos. 1185-1254, f o r f u r t h e r r e f e r e n c e s .
Thus we f i n d t h e f o l l o w i n g p a s s a g e i n t h e French t r a n s l a t i o n of
Hegel's Wissenschaft der Logik of 1812-16 which appeared i n P a r i s i n
1859: "Le n g g a t i f r e p r & e n t e donc t o u t l l o p p o s i t i o n q u i , en t a n t q u '
o p p o s i t i o n , r e p o s e s u r elle-mzme; il e s t l a d i f f g r e n c e a b s o l u e , s a n s
aucun r a p p o r t avec a u t r e chose; en t a n t q u l o p p o s i t i o n , il e s t exclusif
d ' i d e n t i t z e t , p a r consgquent, d e lui-rnzme; c a r , en t a n t que r a p p o r t
2 s'oi, i l - s e d 6 f i n i t c o m e g t a n t c e t t e i d e n t i t 6 mzme q u ' i l e x c l u t . "
We q u o t e from G. W. F. Hegel, Science de Za Zogique, v o l . I1 ( P a r i s :
Aubier, 1 9 4 7 ) , p . 58. For t h e G. t e x t , s . Wisaenschaft i e r Logik,
new ed., v o l I1 (Hamburg: F. Meiner, l 9 6 6 ) , 54-5.

Note t h a t t h e CLG appeared f i r s t i n 1916, i n t h e midst of t h e F i r s t

World War, and t h a t t h e G. and Russ. t r a n s l . of 1931 and 1933 r e s p e c t i v e l y
appeared a t a t i m e when G. s c h o l a r s h i p , proud of and dependent on h e r
h e r i t a g e and a l s o owing t o p a r t i c u l a r s o c i a l and p o i i t i c a l developments,
i s o l a t e d h e r s e l f from i n t e r n a t i o n a l l i n g u i s t i c s , and t h a t Marrisrn and
S t a l i n i s m i n R u s s i a had q u i t e a s i m i l a r e f f e c t ; t h e Span.trans1. appeared
i n 1945 i n A r g e n t i n a , and n o t i n Spain.

Cf. W. W e i d e l i , Journal de GenBve, No. 46 (Pebr. 23/24, 1963).

3.0 CONCLUSION: Saussure's Cours and the State o f Linguistic Science

Die paritztische Verbindung von

Mikroskopie und Makroskopie biZdet das
Ideal der wissenschaftZichen Arbeit; i n
WirkZichkeit kommt meistens die eine
gegeniiber der anderen zu kurz.
Hugo Schuchardt i n 1909
*
~ g m es i Ze Cours d e l i n g u i s t i q u e gGn6rale
$e Ferdinand de Saussure devait un jour
e t r e vieiZZi dans toutes ses parties, i Z
s e r a i t destin; vivre encore dans Ze
souvenir de Za science du iangage 2 cause
de Z 'action puissante e t feconde qu'iZ a
exerc6e 2 un moment de son &oZution.
A l b e r t Sechehaye i n 1940 (VR 5 :1)

Nous disons i c i que Saussure n p p q t i e n t

d6sormais 2 Z ' h i s t o i r e de Za pensee euro-
@enne. Pr6curseur des doctrines qui ont
depuis cinquante ans transform; Za th&-
r i e du Zangage, i Z a jet; des vuea inoa-
bZiabZes sur Za facuZte' Za plus haute et
Za plus myst&ieuse de Z'horrune . ..
Emile Benveniste i n 1963 (CFS 20:21)

Our s t u d y h a s been i n s p i r e d above a l l by a twofold concern; f i r s t l y ,

w e b e l i e v e t h a t two g e n e r a t i o n s a f t e r t h e p u b l i c a t i o n of t h e Cours
g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y h a s n o t y e t been accorded i t s p r o p e r p l a c e i n
l i n g u i s t i c s , and secondly t h a t t h e h i s t o r y of l i n g u i s t i c thought h a s n o t
y e t a t t a i n e d a n a c c e p t a b l e l e v e l of m a t u r i t y . While w e n o t e t h a t i n
r e c e n t y e a r s , perhaps l a r g e l y a s a r e s u l t of Chomsky's Aspects of 1965,
more s c h o l a r s have d i r e c t e d t h e i r a t t e n t i o n t o t h e d i s c u s s i o n of g e n e r a l
problems in. l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y , t h e h i s t o r y of t h e s e i d e a s which h a s
occupied t h e human mind e v e r s i n c e an awareness of language developed,
however, i s s t i l l i n l e a d i n g s t r i n g s .
 390
Although l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y and t h e h i s t o r y of i t s development can t o
a c e r t a i n e x t e n t b e t r e a t e d a s ' s e p a r a t e components of l i n g u i s t i c s c i e n c e ,
we m a i n t a i n t h a t b o t h a s p e c t s a r e i n many r e s p e c t s i n t e r r e l a t e d . First
of a l l , t h e t h e o r y of language and t h e h i s t o r y of l i n g u i s t i c s a r e b o t h
concerned w i t h t h e r e s u l t s of r e f l e c t i o n on human speech, t h e main d i s -
/' t i n c t i o n b e i n g t h a t t h e former a d o p t s t h e "synchronic" and t h e l a t t e r t h e
, I1
d i a c h r o n i c " viewpoint s o t o speak. Secondly, t h e t h e o r i s t of t o d a y ,
though h e may d e l u d e h i m s e l f t h a t h e i s s t a r t i n g ab ouo when h e proposes
a c e r t a i n p r i n c i p l e o r theorem, cannot d i v e s t himself t o t a l l y from e i t h e r
i t h e i n t e l l e c t u a l environment of h i s own time i n g e n e r a l o r t h e c u l t u r a l l y
t r a n s m i t t e d i d e a s about language i n p a r t i c u l a r . It i s n o t n e c e s s a r y t o
have r e a d t h e s o - c a l l e d h i s t o r i e s of l i n g u i s t i c s t o have knowledge of
p r e v i o u s o p i n i o n s about language; o u r u p b r i n g i n g , c u l t u r a l h e r i t a g e , and
t o a c e r t a i n e x t e n t t h e s o c i e t y s u r r o u n d i n g u s i . n c u l c a t e us w i t h many
i d e a s which we e v e n t u a l l y tend t o c o n s i d e r a s t h e r e s u l t of o u r own
creative capacities. T h i r d l y , t h e h i s t o r y of l i n g u i s t i c s can o n l y b e
a d e q u a t e l y p r e s e n t e d by t h o s e who engage o r who have p r e v i o u s l y engaged
i n t h e a c t i v i t i e s of 'normal s c i e n c e ' ; t h e philosophically-minded
e n t h u s i a s t who h a s recognized t h a t t h e h i s t o r y of l i n g u i s t i c s may w e l l
r e p r e s e n t t h e h i s t o r y of i d e a s par exeelZenee might do more harm t h a n
good t o t h i s f i e l d of ( p o t e n t i a l l y ) s c h o l a r l y a c t i v i t y u n l e s s h e h a s
r e c e i v e d a formal t r a i n i n g i n l i n g u i s t i c s i n g e n e r a l . Finally,
linguistics -- and we wish t o p o i n t t o i t s t h e o r e t i c a l a s p e c t s i n
particular -- cannot b e r i g h t l y regarded a s a mature s c i e n c e u n l e s s i t
h a s e s t a b l i s h e d a l i n k w i t h and a g e n e r a l awareness of i t s p a s t . It i s
our c o n v i c t i o n t h a t , w h i l e advances i n l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y may b e s a i d t o
p r e c e d e t h e c o d i f i c a t i o n of i t s r e s u l t s w i t h i n t h e h i s t o r y of l i n g u i s t i c s ,
i t would b e naxve t o b e l i e v e t h a t o u r p r e s e n t d i s c o v e r i e s about t h e
n a t u r e of language could have been p o s s i b l e w i t h o u t t h e p r e v i o u s endea-
v o u r s of man t o i n v e s t i g a t e it. The r e c o g n i t i o n of o u r p r e d e c e s s o r s
t h e r e f o r e i s n o t merely a n a c t of r e v e r e n c e rendered t o t h o s e whom we
a r r o g a n t l y r e g a r d a s exponents of t h e o r i e s which have become o b s o l e t e
and p o s s i b l y i r r e l e v a n t o r even f a l s e b u t more a s i g n of i n t e l l e c t u a l
h o n e s t y and g e n e r a l awareness t h a t we owe s o much t o o u r a n c e s t o r s
 39 1
whether w e a g r e e w i t h them o r oppose t h e i r s u g g e s t i o n s .
However, t h e r e q u e s t f o r a n a p p r o p r i a t e r e c o g n i t i o n o f o u r a n t e c e -
d e n t s a p p e a r s p r e m a t u r e , n o t b e c a u s e of any s u s p i c i o n t h a t l i n g u i s t i c s
might n o t y e t have reached t h e s t a t u s of a n autonomous s c i e n c e -- in
r e c e n t y e a r s c e r t a i n t r e n d s which t h r e a t e n t h i s s t a t u s , b o t h from w i t h i n
and w i t h o u t may have developed -- b u t simply because t h e e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l
b a s i s f o r t h e h i s t o r y of l i n g u i s t i c s h a s n o t y e t , t o any s e r i o u s d e g r e e ,
been e s t a b l i s h e d . U n t i l t h e t h e o r e t i c a l framework of a n h i s t o r i o g r a p h y
h a s been developed, one cannot e x p e c t t h e l i n g u i s t t o t a k e v e r y s e r i o u s l y
t h o s e p u b l i c a t i o n s which p r e t e n d t o b e h i s t o r i c a l a c c o u n t s of t h e way i n
which o u r f o r e f a t h e r s thought about language b u t which o n l y t o o f r e q u e n t l y
f a l l s h o r t of t h e b a s i c r e q u i r e m e n t s of s c h o l a r s h i p and s c i e n t i f i c
e x p e r t i s e , namely a w e l l - d e f i n e d frame of r e f e r e n c e w i t h i n which t h e y may
d e f i n e t h e i r a c t i v i t i e s and a thorough f i r s t - h a n d a c q u a i n t a n c e w i t h
primary s o u r c e s .
A s f a r a s t h e f i r s t b a s i c r e q u i r e m e n t , namely t h a t of an epistem-
ology f o r t h e h i s t o r y of l i n g u i s t i c s , i s concerned, o u r s t u d y cannot b e
regarded a s r e p r e s e n t i n g a n y t h i n g more t h a n a f i r s t a t t e m p t t o approach
t h i s problem s e r i o u s l y and t o s u g g e s t ways i n which f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h
s h o u l d b e conducted. The o t h e r no l e s s i m p o r t a n t p r e r e q u i s i t e , i . e . a
f i r m g r a s p of t h e r e s gestae, should b e d i s c u s s e d i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h t h e
former, b u t i t should a l s o b e p o i n t e d o u t a t t h i s s t a g e t h a t f o r one
t h i n g t h e h i s t o r y of l i n g u i s t i c s cannot b e w r i t t e n by r e l y i n g on o t h e r
1
" h i s t o r i e s " of l i n g u i s t i c s .
It h a s been o u r c o n v i c t i o n a l l a l o n g t h a t l i n g u i s t i c s b e l o n g s t o t h e
human and s o c i a l s c i e n c e s and t h a t no s e r i o u s s t u d e n t of language can
i g n o r e t h e f a c t t h a t h i s o b j e c t of i n v e s t i g a t i o n cannot b e r e g a r d e d i n
i s o l a t i o n from o t h e r phenomena a s s o c i a t e d w i t h i t , a l t h o u g h p a r t i c u l a r
forms of r e s e a r c h may demand t h a t such a b s t r a c t i o n b e made, If i t i s
agreed t h a t language i s a p s y c h i c a l and n o t a p h y s i c a l e n t i t y , t h e n
r e f l e c t i o n s about i t s n a t u r e and mechanism a r e a t l e a s t a n o t h e r s t e p
removed from p h y s i c a l v e r i f i c a t i o n . Indeed, i t i s o u r c l a i m t h a t t h e
h i s t o r y of l i n g u i s t i c s , once e s t a b l i s h e d a s a s e r i o u s d i s c i p l i n e w i t h i n
t h e human s c i e n c e s , w i l l r e p r e s e n t t h e h i s t o r y of i d e a s p a r exceZZence,
 392
a c l a i m which t o o u r knowledge h a s n o t been made s o f a r i n t h e l i t e r a t u r e
(cf. 0.0), perhaps because o n e , i s f a c e d w i t h what p h i l o s o p h e r s have
termed t h e "Problem d e r ~ e l b s t v e r s t & d l i c h k e i t " . We have made t h i s
assumption because w e b e l i e v e t h a t no o t h e r d i s c i p l i n e w i t h i n t h e A r t s ,
i n c l u d i n g l i t e r a t u r e and philosophy, r e f l e c t s t h e i n t e l l e c t u a l paradigm
of a given p e r i o d q u i t e s o conspicuously a s t h e d i s c u s s i o n s a b o u t language,
be it i n Pla.tofs BatyZus, Thomas of E r f u r t ' s G r m a t i c a speculativa,
S c h l e i c h e r ' s Compendium o r S a u s s u r e ' s Cows.
S t a r t i n g from t h e s e premisses t h e h i s t o r i a n of l i n g u i s t i c s would
have t o engage i n r e s e a r c h aimed a t r e - e s t a b l i s h i n g t h e g e n e r a l i n t e l l e c -
t u a l atmosphere p r e v a i l i n g a t a t i m e when a g i v e n s c h o l a r , whose work
became v e r y important f o r subsequent i n v e s t i g a t i o n s , formed h i s i d e a s .
T h i s i s by no means e a s i l y achieved and much r e a d i n g of e x t r a - l i n g u i s t i c
l i t e r a t u r e of t h e p e r i o d i n c o n s i d e r a t i o n must b e done b e f o r e a w e l l -
judged and adequate b a s i s f o r t h e assessment of a g i v e n l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y
can b e e s t a b l i s h e d . Ws m a i n t a i n t h a t u n l e s s such a p r e l i m i n a r y i n v e s t i -
g a t i o n i s made t h e achievement of a p a r t i c u l a r a u t h o r cannot b e p l a c e d i n
p r o p e r p e r s p e c t i v e and f a i l u r e t o do t h i s may e a s i l y l e a d t o u n j u s t i f i e d
c s i t i c i s r n and h a s t y d i s m i s s a l of h i s p r o p o s a l s . T h i s should n o t b e t a k e n
a s an argument f o r t h e r e t e n t i o n of a given view which, i f t h e i n t e l l e c t u a l
paradigm h a s undergone a n o t i c e a b l e change, can no l o n g e r b e m a i n t a i n e d ;
i n f a c t , t h e l i n g u i s t who r e j e c t s a p a r t i c u l a r t h e o r y does n o t r e j e c t t h e
t h e o r y a s such ( s i n c e c o n s i d e r i n g i t s s o c i o - h k t o r i c a l s e t t i n g i t nay have
been adequate a t t h a t time) b u t t h e paradigm of which t h e t h e o r y was a
reflection.
With t h e s e g e n e r a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s i n mind, we d e c i d e d t o choose a
work w i t h whose c o n t e n t s e v e r y l i n g u i s t of today i s f a m i l i a r i n one way
o r t h e o t h e r , i . e . e i t h e r through i n d i v i d u a l r e a d i n g of t h e work i t s e l f
o r through a c q u a i n t a n c e w i t h more r e c e n t l i n g u i s t i c p u b l i c a t i o n s which
d i r e c t l y o r i n d i r e c t l y have absorbed and reworked many of i t s i d e a s .
Perhaps because of i t s c o n t i n u i n g impact on contemporary d e b a t e i n
l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y i t h a s been d i f f i c u l t t o view ~ a u s s u r e ' s p r i n c i p l e s i n
t h e i r proper h i s t o r i c a l perspective. Moreover, t h e i r h i s t o r y i s f a i r l y
r e c e n t , and i t a p p e a r s l e s s d i f f i c u l t t o r e - e s t a b l i s h t h e i m p o r t a n t
 393
currents of Saussure's own time than those of earlier periods in the
development of linguistic thought. Despite these apparent advantages,
i.e. the chronological proximity and wide-spread acquaintance with
Saussurean ideas, it cannot be said that the Cours has heen adequately
treated and interpreted by the majority of scholars; in fact, most of the
criticisms levelled against certain aspects of Saussure's teachings
reveal a lack of historical perspective on the part of the critic, and
many of those who tend to praise Saussure excessively do not show them-
selves to be better informed. Indeed, it appears that the Cours is
generally regarded as the result of a creative act on the part of a
genius who, similar to what schoolbooks relate about Copernicus, broke
completely with tradition and put forward a structural view of language
to replace the "atomistic" treatment of linguistic phenomena by his
predecessors, in particular the neogrammarians. No doubt this tendency
to regard Saussure as something like a creator ex: nihiZo made his theory V
'

vulnerable, whereas there are in fact definite indications tha.t even a

great man, such as Saussure undoubtedly was, could not escape the impact
of the intellectual atmosphere of his own time. On the other hand, the
achievements of Saussure's predecessors as well as those of his contempo-
raries have not only been neglected but downgraded to such an extent
that .many linguists of today do not think it worth while to consider
their ideas seriously. It has been a part of our study to remedy these
and other misleading preconceptions and to rectify a number of the biased
views held by contemporary linguists and perpetuated in the "histories"
of linguistics which have appeared in recent years.2 Indeed it is a
serious misunderstanding to regard Saussure as a modern linguist in any
respect and attempts to make him infallible have led to (at times
unwarranted) attacks which would not have been made otherwise. Saussure's
greatness cannot be established by simply acclaiming the originality of
his ideas, a claim which could in most instances be easily refuted by
the informed historian of linguists, but precisely by demonstrating how
much Saussure was a part of the intellectual paradigm of his own time.
In other words, by putting Saussure in his historical context we may
appreciate both his intellectual achievement in welding the ideas of his
time together into a general theory of language and the superiority of
his theory in comparison with those put forward by his contemporaries.3
Our present study constitutes such an attempt, i.e. to place
Saussure in proper historical perspective by trying to establish what we
have termed, following T. S. Kuhn's suggestion, a paradigm of the late
19th century in Western Europe. We discussed in particular Saussure's
alleged sociologism since it appears to have become a fable convenue in
histories of linguistics to claim that Saussure was heavily influenced
by Durkheimian sociology (cf. 1.2.1.1). We have also investigated the
possible influence of Tarde's and Walras' economic theories on Saussure
in order to establish whether certain suggestions made in recent years
can be verified (cf. 1.2.1.2), and have also considered other intellect-
ual currents of the last quarter of the 19th century, in particular
psychology.
The result of our investigations can be summed up as follows: 1) We
have found no evidence that there has been any direct influence by
Durkheim, Comte or Tarde or any other sociologist on Saussure; however,
there are two major sources through which Saussure became acquainted with
sociological notions: a) Whitney's emphasis on the social nature of
language, his distinction between the individual and the community in his
attempt to explain linguistic change, and a number of other related sug-
gestions (cf. 1.3.1), and b) Meillet's programmatic article in 1906 in
which he made use of Durkheimian ideas for the definition of language
(cf. 2.2.1.2). This means that, while direct influence of sociological
theories on Saussure's linguistic thought has to be denied, there is
sufficient evidence for our claim that Spencerian (through Whitney) and
Durkheimian (by the intermediary of Meillet) sociological notions made
their way into Saussure's argument. In any case sociology played an
important part in the late 19th century, and hardly anyone could have
escaped its pervasive influence. 2) Similar observations have been made
concerning other extra-linguistic influences, although, in the case of
political economy, we have nd found any linguistic publication of the
time in which the notion of value for instance had been anticipated. It
appears that Saussure derived this idea from economic theory which became
 395
very important in the last three decades of the 19th century (cf. 1.2.1.2);
the comparison of language with1money or words with pieces of money,
however, has been a literary t o p s for more than two millenia.4 3) Other
extra-linguistic influences on Saussure, in particular psychological
notions, can be traced back to l i n g u i s t i c writings of Saussure's own time,
especially to the work of H. Paul (who, for his part, adopted Herbartian
psychology) and Kruszewski (who made use of the psychology of Bain, James,
and earlier British associationists).
On the whole our conviction has been that Saussure's ideas, though
they have absorbed notions anticipated outside linguistics proper -- and
we may recall that apart from valeur, a term from economy, other terms
such as z&o and terme were derived from mathematics, for instance -- v

have been the result of his reflections on essentially linguistic problems.

It is therefore not surprising that essential parts of Saussure's theory
of language had been anticipated, in one way or the other, in earlier
5 ,;
linguistic writings or in publications of his own time.
Apart from having established that Saussure was, in many respects,
impregnated by the intellectual paradigm of his own time, the bulk of the
first part of the inquiry was devoted to tracing the linguistic sources
of Saussure's theories. We have shown, and we believe quite convincingly,
that the neogrammarians, in particular Paul and Sievers, were by no means
as "atomistic" in their approach to linguistic analysis as the majority
of authors of "histories" of linguistics would like to have us believe.
Indeed, we think that there is sufficient evidence for our claim that,
next to Whitney, Paul's Prinzipien was a major source of Saussure's
inspiration, both by suggesting certain linguistic concepts and distinc-
tions of theoretical importance (cf. 1.3.2.2.1-3) and by inviting
criticism of and opposition to his ideas. Some may regret that Baudouin
de Courtenay never codified his views, except for those pertaining to
phonological analysis in his Versuch einer Theoz-ie phonetischer
Alternaticnen of 1895; this may be of some significance because our
investigation has not found much evidence for recent claims that he
influenced Saussure's linguistic thought considerably (cf. 1.3.3.2). In
contrast to Baudouin, his pupil, M. Kruszewski, who had received formal
 39 6
t r a i n i n g i n psychology and l o g i c b e f o r e s p e c i a l i z i n g i n l i n g u i s t i c re-
s e a r c h , a p p e a r s t o have made a inore profound impact on S a u s s u r e .
Indeed,
w e have shown t h a t Kruszewski, who made e x t e n s i v e u s e of t h e concept of
a s s o c i a t i o n , s u g g e s t e d perhaps more c l e a r l y t h a n P a u l ( c f . 1.3.2.2.3)
the d i s t i n c t i o n between p a r a d i g m a t i c and a s s o c i a t i v e r e l a t i o n s i n
language, and a l s o , w i t h i n s i g h t comparable t o P a u l ' s ( c f . 1.3.2.2.1),
t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between d e s c r i p t i v e and h i s t o r i c a l a s p e c t s of language
study .
I n c o n t r a s t t o t h e i n f l u e n c e of Whitney, t h e n e o g r a m a r i a n s , and
t h e l e a d e r s of t h e Kazan s c h o o l , o u r f i n d i n g s cannot s u p p o r t o t h e r
r e c e n t c l a i m s , t o w i t t h a t l i n g u i s t s i n t h e Humboldtian t r a d i t i o n have
had a n i m p o r t a n t impact on S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r y of language. Furthermore,
a l t h o u g h we have been a b l e t o e s t a b l i s h t h a t , c o n t r a r y t o what some
" h i s t o r i e s " o f l i n g u i s t i c s s u g g e s t , t h e r e has been an u n i n t e r r u p t e d l i n e
i n t h e t r a d i t i o n of Humboldtian i d e a s of t h e 1 9 t h c e n t u r y ( c f . 1 . 3 . 4 ) ,
no s t r o n g e v i d e n c e could b e found t h a t G. von d e r G a b e l e n t z ' s
Sprachwissenschaft of 1891 (2nd e d . , 1901) o r t h e w r i t i n g s by F. N . Finck
( c f . 1.3.4.2 and 1 . 3 . 4 . 3 r e s p e c t i v e l y ) had a n i m p o r t a n t impact on
S a u s s u r e ' s l i n g u i s t i c thought.
While t h e f i r s t p a r t of t h e s t u d y was devoted t o e l u c i d a t i n g t h e
n a t u r e of t h e i n t e l l e c t u a l paradigm of S a u s s u r e ' s own t i m e and t o a
s u b s t a n t i a l account of how s t r o n g l y i t i n f l u e n c e d h i s l i n g u i s t i c argument
( c f . 1 . 4 ) , t h e second p a r t c o n s t i t u t e s a l i m i t e d a t t e m p t t o show how
major a s p e c t s of t h e new l i n g u i s t i c paradigm c o n s t r u c t e d by S a u s s u r e on
t h e p l i n t h of t h e o l d have evolved d u r i n g t h e f i f t y - f i v e y e a r s f o l l o w i n g
t h e p u b l i c a t i o n of t h e Cours i n 1916. I n o t h e r words, o u r s t u d y c o v e r s
roughly t h e p e r i o d of 1870 t o 1915 i n t h e f i r s t p a r t ( 1 . 0 ) , though
e a r l i e r p e r i o d s have n o t been completely i g n o r e d ( c f . 1 . 2 , 1 . 3 , 1 . 3 . 4 ) ,
i . e . t h e s p a n of t i m e which w e may c a l l t h e paradigm of ~ a u s s u r e ' s own
t i m e , and t h e p e r i o d between 1916 and 1970 i n t h e second ( 2 . 0 ) . However,
t h e l i n k between t h e second p a r t and t h e f i r s t i s t h e f i r s t c h a p t e r of
each of t h e f o u r major s e c t i o n s of t h i s p a r t i n which p a r t i c u l a r a t t e n -
t i o n h a s been devoted t o t h e q u e s t i o n of p r e c u r s o r s of ~ a u s s u r e ' smost
i n f l u e n t i a l d i s t i n c t i o n s and c o n c e p t s , i . e . langue v s . parole (2.2.1 . I ) ,
 39 7
synchrony v s . d i a c h r o n y (2.2.2.1), t h e language s i g n and i t s p r o p e r t i e s
i
(2.2.3.1), and syntagrnatic and * a s s o c i a t i v e r e l a t i o n s between l i n g u i s t i c '

e l e m e n t s (2.2.4.1).
Indeed t h e h i s t o r i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e h a s been predominant i n t h e d i s -
c u s s i o n s of S a u s s u r e ' s l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y n o t o n l y i n each of t h e f i r s t
c h a p t e r s of t h e s e c t i o n s b u t a l s o throughout o u r a t t e m p t t o re-
e s t a b l i s h S a u s s u r e ' s a c t u a l c o n c e p t s and t h e i r e v o l u t i o n d u r i n g h i s own
life-time, something which i s u r g e n t l y needed f o r contemporary d e b a t e s
on l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y (which, w e would a r g u e , cannot e s c a p e Saussurean
ideas). The p u b l i c a t i o n s of S a u s s u r e ' s own p a p e r s and s t u d e n t s ' n o t e s
by Godel ( 1 9 5 5 f f . ) and Engler ( 1 9 5 9 f f . ) have provided t h e b a s i s f o r such
an u n d e r t a k i n g , b u t u n t i l a l l of S a u s s u r e ' s p a p e r s have appeared and t h e
t i m e of t h e i r composition e s t a b l i s h e d , a number of q u e s t i o n s must remain
unanswered.
However, i t i s d o u b t f u l whether t h e s e r e c e n t e f f o r t s w i l l have a
g r e a t impact on t h e f u r t h e r development of t h e (post-) Saussurean para-
digm. A f t e r a l l , a p a r t from t h e works of De Mauro ( 1 9 6 5 f f . ) , D e r o s s i
(1965), L i e b (1968, 1 9 7 0 ) , and a few o t h e r s , l i n g u i s t s have by and
l a r g e chosen t o i g n o r e t h e e x i s t e n c e of t h e c r i t i c a l e d i t i o n of t h e
Cours a s w e l l a s o t h e r p u b l i c a t i o n s i n t e n d e d t o r e c t i f y and r e - a s s e s s
Saussure's o r i g i n a l ideas. This i s n o t t h e place t o introduce implica-
t i o n s of i n t e l l e c t u a l l a z i n e s s , b u t t h i s s t a t e of a f f a i r s does i n d i c a t e ,
i n o u r view, a complacency which we do n o t t h i n k l i n g u i s t i c s can a f f o r d
i f i t wishes t o b e looked upon a s a s c i e n c e . Indeed s e l f - r e s p e c t which
i s based on o n e ' s own c o n v i c t i o n of having achieved something worth
w h i l e c o n s t i t u t e s t h e f i r s t s t e p towards mature s c i e n c e ; however, i t i s
of prime importance t o have d e f i n e d t h e o b j e c t of o n e ' s p a r t i c u l a r f i e l d ,
b u t even more i m p o r t a n t t o have a r t i c u l a t e d t h e t h e o r e t i c a l framework
w i t h i n which o n e ' s own s c i e n t i f i c a c t i v i t y s h o u l d b e pursued.
S a u s s u r e h a s g i v e n u s b o t h , t h e d e f i n i t i o n of t h e o b j e c t of i n v e s t i -
g a t i o n and t h e axioms by which l i n g u i s t i c r e s e a r c h should b e c a r r i e d o u t .
S a u s s u r e ' s dependence on t h e paradigm of h i s own t i m e a s w e l l a s o t h e r
perhaps more a c c i d e n t a l c i r c u m s t a n c e s prevented him from expounding h i s
own t h e o r y i n more d e t a i l ; many of h i s i d e a s were, a s f a r a s t h e n e c e s s a r y
 398
r i g o u r o f s t a t e m e n t and t h e i r t h e o r e t i c a l consequences a r e concerned,
v e r y much ahead of h i s time a n 4 w i l l t h e r e f o r e e x p l a i n t h e i r a u t h o r ' s
hesitation. For t h e l i n g u i s t of today i t i s q u i t e e a s y t o f i n d f a u l t
w i t h a number of S a u s s u r e ' s s u g g e s t i o n s ; most of them can b e e x p l a i n e d
by f e a t u r e s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of t h e paradigm p r e v a i l i n g i n l a t e 1 9 t h - c e n t u r y
Western Europe, i . e . sociologism, psychologism, and p o s i t i v i s m . However,
once t h e s e a s p e c t s have been removed, S a u s s u r e ' s i d e a s w i l l a p p e a r much
more a c c e p t a b l e and adequate, and i n f a c t we m a i n t a i n t h a t i t i s t h e d u t y
of t h e l i n g u i s t of t h e post-Saussurean e r a t o s i f t t h e c h a f f from t h e
p r o p o s a l s made i n t h e Cows, t o r e d e f i n e t h e e s s e n t i a l components of
S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r y , and t o do s o i n our own terms.
I n t h e f o u r c e n t r a l s e c t i o n s of t h e second p a r t of t h e i n q u i r y , i n
p a r t i c u l a r i n t h e t h i r d c h a p t e r of each s e c t i o n , we have d i s c u s s e d t h e
way i n which modern l i n g u i s t s have attempted t o e x p l o i t o r perhaps more
a p t l y t h e i r f a i l u r e t o expound ~ a u s s u r e ' sl i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y . We noted on
s e v e r a l o c c a s i o n s t h a t S a u s s u r e ' s impact on 20th-century l i n g u i s t i c s has
been l a r g e l y by means of i s o l a t e d components of h i s g e n e r a l t h e o r y of
language ( c f . 2.1, 2.2.2.3, and e l s e w h e r e ) , an o b s e r v a t i o n which w e f i n d
e s p e c i a l l y d e p l o r a b l e i n t h o s e i n s t a n c e s where t h e t h e o r i s t h a s claimed
t o have c o n s t r u c t e d h i s own t h e o r y i n t h e t r u e Saussurean s p i r i t ( c f . 2 . 3
f o r a n e x p l i c i t s t a t e m e n t of t h e ' s t a t e of t h e a r t ' ) . Our argument,
however, h a s been t h a t S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r y h a s t o b e t a k e n a s a whole, and
t h a t t h e t h e o r i s t f o l l o w i n g h i s s u g g e s t i o n s cannot simply make u s e of
c e r t a i n components w h i l e i g n o r i n g a ) t h e c o n t e x t i n which they occur and
b) t h e f a c t t h a t t h e p a r t s d e r i v e t h e i r a p p r o p r i a t e meaning from t h e i r
i n t e r r e l a t i o n w i t h i n t h e whole. S i n c e we b e l i e v e t h a t i t i s q u i t e
i m p o s s i b l e t o r e j e c t S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r y a s such -- and indeed t h a t many of
t h e i d e a s p u t forward i n t h e C o w s have n o t bee.n exhausted -- i t becomes
t h e t a s k of post-Saussurean l i n g u i s t s t o engage i n what we have termed
on o c c a s i o n , w i t h r e f e r e n c e t o T. S. Kuhn, "mopping-up o p e r a t i o n s " , i . e .
i n t h e reworking of S a u s s u r e ' s t h e o r y i n i t s complexity and t o t a l i t y i n
t h e l i g h t of o u r p r e s e n t u n d e r s t a n d i n g of t h e n a t u r e of t h i n g s . That
S a u s s u r e ' s g e n e r a l t h e o r y of language r e q u i r e s re-assessment and r e -
e v a l u a t i o n h a s been s t r e s s e d a g a i n and a g a i n i n t h e second p a r t of t h e
s t u d y ; t h a t h i s t h e o r y deserves s u c h a n u n d e r t a k i n g needs no f u r t h e r
c o r r o b o r a t i o n , b u t t h a t i t i s t h e d u t y of modern l i n g u i s t s t o engage i n
s u c h a n e n t e r p r i s e must b e c o n s t a n t l y emphasized, i f l i n g u i s t i c s i s e v e r
t o a t t a i n a p o s i t i o n i n t h e s o c i a l and human s c i e n c e s which p h y s i c s enjoy
i n t h e n a t u r a l and e x a c t s c i e n c e s .
I n a programmatic a r t i c l e p u b l i s h e d i n 1966 i n which h e d i s c u s s e d
s c i e n t i f i c c r i t e r i a i n t h e s o c i a l and human d i s c i p l i n e s , C . ~ & i - S t r a u s s
l i s t e d t h r e e p r i n c i p l e s f o r according t o l i n g u i s t i c s ( i n c o n t r a s t t o t h e
o t h e r s o c i a l s c i e n c e s ) a p o s i t i o n comparable t o t h e e x a c t n a t u r a l
sciences: 1 ) L i n g u i s t i c s p o s s e s s e s a n o b j e c t of i n v e s t i g a t i o n which i s
o f a u n i v e r s a l n a t u r e ; 2) i t s method i s homogeneous, i . e . i r r e s p e c t i v e of
t h e language under i n v e s t i g a t i o n , and 3) t h e method r e s t s on a few
fundamental p r i n c i p l e s whose v a l u e i s g e n e r a l l y recognized by t h e
s p e c i a l i s t s i n t h e given area.6 While we a g r e e w i t h t h e c o r r e c t n e s s of
t h e f i r s t p o i n t made by ~ & i - ~ t r a u s s we
, tend t o d i s a g r e e w i t h t h e second
inasmuch a s t h e a u t h o r c l a i m s t h a t t h i s a s p e c t has become r e a l i t y w i t h i n
t h e d i s c i p l i n e of l i n g u i s t i c s where i n f a c t t h e r e a r e no i n d i c a t i o n s
t h a t t h i s i s s o ( c f . t h e d i f f e r e n t methods of a n a l y s i s p u t forward by
M a r t i n e t , F i r t h , P i k e , Togeby, Chomsky and many o t h e r s ) . As f o r the
J
t h i r d p r i n c i p l e we would submit t h a t t h i s argument i s t h e most u n s a t i s -
f a c t o r y of t h e t h r e e , f o r t h e f o l l o w i n g r e a s o n s : 1) it r e s t r i c t s (the
more o r l e s s ) unanimous a c c e p t a n c e of t h e b a s i c p r i n c i p l e s of r e s e a r c h
t o t h e s p e c i a l i s t , whereas we b e l i e v e t h a t such a n agreement should
i n c l u d e anyone working i n l i n g u i s t i c s and t h a t no one could s e r i o u s l y
c o n s i d e r h i m s e l f a s c i e n t i s t w i t h o u t adherence t o t h e s e g e n e r a l
p r i n c i p l e s ; 2 ) i t p l a c e s t o o much importance on methodology w i t h o u t
s p e c i f y i n g t h e p r i n c i p l e s u n d e r l y i n g them, and 3 ) i t i g n o r e s what we
b e l i e v e t o b e t h e most i m p o r t a n t argument which would s e r v e t o make
l i n g u i s t i c s a mature science comparable w i t h p h y s i c s : t h e necessary
primacy of theory, i . e . of an o v e r - a l l t h e o r y of how l i n g u i s t i c s i s t o
view i t s o b j e c t of i n q u i r y . I f and o n l y i f l i n g u i s t s become aware n o t
o n l y of t h e f a c t t h a t i t i s t h e importance of t h e o r y which h a s made
p h y s i c s an e x a c t s c i e n c e p a r excelZence b u t a l s o come t o r e a l i z e t h a t no
one engaging i n normal l i n g u i s t i c a c t i v i t i e s can e s c a p e t h i s prime
requirement then we may cite with approval ~&i-~trauss' anticipatory
Zcrudatio: "dans l'ensemble desbsciences sociales et humaines, la
linguistique seule peut gtre mise de plain-pied avec les sciences exactes
et naturelles. 817
 FOOTNOTES - 3.0

* Cf. Schuchardt in Revue intemationaZe des gtudes basques (Paris)

3:135 (1909); repr. in Hugo Schuchmdt-Breuier, p. 410.
1
For an example of how the history of linguistics should not be
written, s. K. V. Teeter's review of Waterman's Perspectives i n
LinguCstics (Chicago Univ. Press, 1963) in Language 41:512-8 (1965) .
2
Exceptions to the rule have been mentioned whenever such a refer-
ence appeared justified; e.g. 1vi;'s and Helbig 's insightful observations
about the theories of Hermann Paul (cf. 1.3.2.2).

.
Cf R. Jakobson's fine distinction between the achievements of
Paul's Prinzipien and FdS's Cours (SW I, 294), and also ~Ghler's (1965:
6f.) observations to this effect.

Cf. H. Weinrich. "~Gnzeund Wort: Untersuchungen zu einem

Bildfeld", Romanica: Festschrift fib Gerhard RohZfs ed. by H. Lausberg
and H. Weinrich (Halle/S.: M. Niemeyer, 1958), 508-21.

Where the influence of Hegelian philosophy on FdS is concerned, we

concede that so far no particular Zinguistic source has been found through
which FdS might have absorbed certain notions which play an important
part in his linguistic argument and which we believe to be "adh&ions
.
hegeliennes" (cf 2.2.1.1 and 2.3) . .
V Henry's Antinomies Zinguistiques
(Paris: F . Alcan, 1896) do not, to any noticeable degree, exhibit Hegelian
ideas which could have led to the Saussurean argument about the distinct--
ive, oppositive, and essentially negative relations between linguistic
elements and the concept of identity. We are inclined to believe that A.
Naville's pamphlet, La Logique de 2 ' i d e n t i t s e t ceZZe de Za contmdiction:
Notes cr<tiques (Geneva: Georg, 1909), might have had an influence on
FdS's linguistic argument.
6
Cf. ~&i-~trauss,"~rit$res scientifiques dans les disciplines
sociales et humaines", AZetheia (Paris) 4:189-212 (May 1966) , esp. pp .
200ff. S. also B. ~almber~'s comment in SL 20.2:124-6 (1966), in
particular his spurious remarks,on what he believes to have been "le but
des grands linguistes de notre epoquel'(p. 126).
 I

MASTER LIST OF REFERENCES

N.B. The p r e s e n t l i s t c o n t a i n s o n l y t h o s e works t o which r e f e r e n c e h a s

been made on s e v e r a l o c c a s i o n s i n t h e s t u d y ; many o t h e r b i b l i o g r a p h i c a l
i t e m s w i l l b e found i n t h e f o o t n o t e s t o each c h a p t e r i n q u e s t i o n . For
a more complete b i b l i o g r a p h y on t h e p r e s e n t t o p i c , see E . F. K . Koerner,
BibZiographia Saussureana, 1870-2970: An Annotated and Classsified Bib-
Ziography on the Background, Development, and ActuaZ Relevance o f
Ferdinand de Saussure's General Theory of Language (Metuchen, N . J . : The
Scarecrow P r e s s , I n c . [ i n p r e s s ] ) , 406 pp. See a l s o pp. x x x v i i - x l f o r a
number o f f u r t h e r works which have been r e f e r r e d t o by means of s i g l a ,
e . g . CLG, CLG(E), LGL, LGLF, LHLG, LTS, OSG, P i L , SM, SW, e t c .

w
A p r e s j a n , J u [ r i j ] D [ e r e n i k o v i c ] . 1971. Ideen und Methoden der modemen
stry~ktureZZenLinguistik: Kurzer Abriss. T r a n s l , by B r i g i t t e B a l t o f
.
and E L i s a b e t h Mai (Munich: M. Hueber) , 303 pp. [Russ o r i g i n a l , 140s-
cow 19661.

Arens, Bans. 1969. Sprachwissenschaft: Der Gang i h r e r ~nt7;ickZungvon der

Antike b i s zur Gegenwart. 2nd r e v . and e n l . e d . ( F r e i b u r g & Munich:
K. A l h e r ) , x v i + 816 pp. [ l s t e d . , 19551.

B a l l y , C h a r l e s . 1952. Le Zangage e t l a v i e , 3 r d r e v . e d . (Geneva: Droz);

r e p r . 1965, 236 pp. [ l s t e d . , Geneva 19131.

B a r i l l i , Renato. 1968. "Alcuni problemi e p i s t e m o l o g i c i r e l a t i v i a 1 Corso

d i Zinguistica generaZel'. Lest 3 :223-44.
B a r t h e s , Roland. 1967. Elements of SemioZogy. T r a n s l . by A n n e t t e Lavers
and C o l i n Smith (London: J . Cape), 112 pp. [ F r . o r i g i n a l , P a r i s 19641.

Baudouin d e Courtenay, J a n . 1881. "Nekotorye o t d e l y ' s r a v n i t e l ' n o j gram-

m a t i k i ' s l a v j a n s k i x jazykovf'. RFV 5.3:265-344; a l s o p u b l . s e p a r a t e l y
(Warsaw: M. ~ e m k e v i z , 1 8 8 1 ) , 82 pp.

. 1895.Versuch einer Theorie phonetischer Alternationen: Ein

Capitel aus der Psychophonetik ( S t r a s s b u r g : K . J. T r z b n e r ) , v + 124 pp.

-- . 1904.
464 pp.
Skice Jcpykoznawcze, v o l . I (Warsaw: P Laskauer) , v i i. +
Baudouin de Courtenay, Jan. 1963. Izbrannye
Ed. by S[tepan] ~[ri~or'eviz]
tw
Po o b ~ ~ e mjazykoznmiju,
u
Barxudarov, et al., 2 vols. (MOSCOW:
Izd. AN SSSR) . I

Benveniste, Emile. 1966. ~robZ&nesde Zinguistique ggn&ra~e(paris : Ed.

Gallimard), 356 pp.

Berezin, F [edor] ~[ixaj .

loviz] 1968. 0;erk po i s tori{ jazykoznani ja u
Rossii: Konec XIX - naZalo XX vekov. Preface by A[lekesej]
~[lekeseeviz]Leont 'ev (Moscow: Izd. "Naukal'), 389 pp .
~erngtejn,S[amuil] ~[orisovir](ed.). 1960. I. A. ~oduGnde ~ m t e n z :K
.
30-Zetiju so dnja smerti (Moscow: Akad Nauk SSSR) , 120 pp .
Bierwisch, Manfred. 1966. "Strukturalismus: Geschichte, Probleme und
Methoden". Kursbuch (FrankfurtIM.: Suhrkanp) 5:77-152.

Bloomfield; Leonard. 1933. Language (New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston),
ix + 564 pp. [There have been many repr. of this book].

. 1970. A Leonard BZoomfieZd Anthology. Ed. by Charles r ran cis]

Hockett (Bloomington & London: Indiana Univ. Press), xxix + 553 pp.

Bolelli, Tristano. 1949. Tra storia e Zinguaggio (Arona: Paideia) , 101 pp.

.1965. Per una storia deZZa ricerca Zinguistica: T e s t i e note

introduttive (Naples: Morano) , 598 pp .
.
Brdndal, Viggo 1943. Essais de ZinguistZque g&&a~e. Publ. by Rosally
Brdndal and Knud Togeby (Copenhagen: E. Munksgaard), xii + 174 pp.

~Ghler,Karl. 1965. Sprachtheorie : Die ~arsteZZungsfunktionder Sprache.

2nd ed., with a preface by Friedrich Kainz (Stuttgart: G . Fischer),
xxxiv + 434 pp. [lst ed., 19341.

. .
Buyssens , Eric 1967 La c o m i c a t i o n e t Z 'articuZ.ation h k g u i s tique
(Brussels: Presses Univ. de Bruxelles; Paris: PUF), 175 pp.
Chomsky, Avram Noam. 1964. Current Issues i n ~ i n g u i s t i c~ h e o r y(The
Hague: Mouton), 119 pp.

. 1965. Aspects of the Theory o f Syntax (Cambridge, Mass : M.1 .T

Press) , x + 251 pp . .
[Repr 19691 .
-- . 1966. Ccrtesian Linguistics: A Chapter i n the History of Ratio.i~-
a z i s t Thought (New York: Harper & Row), xvi + 119 pp.

- .& 1968.
-Brace Language and
World), 88 pp.
Mind (New York-Chicago, etc.: Harcourt,
C h r i s t e n s e n , N i e l s Egmont. 1965. On the Nature o f ~ e a n i n g s :A philosophi-
cal AnaZysis. 2nd ed. (Copenhagen: E. Munksgaard) , v i + 212 pp. [ l s t
I
e d . , 19611.

.
C o l l i n d e r , BjGrn. 1962. "Les o r i g i n e s du s t r u c t u r a l i s m e t t ASLU 1.1:1-15.

. 1968. " ~ r i t i s c h eBemerkungen zum Saussureschen Cours d e l i n -

g u i s t i q u e g&Grale". B i d . 1 . 5 :181-210.

C o s e r i u , Eugenio. 1958. ~ i n c r o n i a ,diacronia e h i s t o r i a : EZ probZema dzZ

c m b i o Zing&tico (Montevideo : Univ. de l a R e ~ u b l i c a ,) 1.64 pp .
. 1962. ~ e o s adeZ
Zenguaje y ~ i n g i i k s t i c ageneral: Cinco estudios g*
(Madrid: Ed. Gredos); 2nd e d . , 1967, 323 pp.

. l 9 6 7 a . "L ' a r b i t r a i r e du s i g n e : Zur sp;tgeschichte eines aris-

t o t e l i s c h e n B e g r i f f e s " , ASNS 204:81-112.

. 1967b. "Georg von d e r Gabelentz e t l a l i n g u i s t i q u e synchronique",

Word 23:74-100 [1969].

.1969. Die Gesehichte der SprachphiZosophie uon der k n t i k e b i s

ZUT Gegenwart: Eine a e r s i c h - t . P a r t I: Von der Antike b i s Leibniz.
L e c t u r e n o t e s comp . by Gunter Narr and Rudolf Windisch ( ~ G b i n g e n : TSL) ,
v i + 162 pp.

. 1970.
Sprache - Strukturen und Funktionen: XII ~ u f s z t z eaur
AZZoeminen und Romanischen Sprachwissenschaft. Ed. by Uwe P e t e r s e n
: , 232 pp
( ~ ~ i i n g e nTBL) .
cikobava , Arnold s t e p a n o v i z . 1959. ProbZema jazyka kak prodmetc jazykoz-
n q i j a : Na materiaZe zarubez'nogo jazykoznanija (Moscow: I z d .
"Ucpedigiz") , 179 pp.

D e Groot, A l b e r t W i l l e m . 1968. ~ r ~ l e i d i nt g
o t de aZgemene taaZwetenschap
tevens inleiding t o t de g r m a t i c a van h e t hedendaagse ~ederZands.
3rd ed. (Groningen: Wolters-Noordhoff) , xiv + 438 pp. [ l s t e d . , 19621.

.
De Mauro, T u l i i o ( t x a n s l . & e d . ) 1968. Corso d i Zinguistica generaze d i
Ferdinand de Saussure. 2nd e n l . e d . ( B a r i : L a t e r z a ) , x i i i + 487 pp.

, 1969. Une introduction 2 Za sgmantique. T r a n s l . from t h e I t .

by Louis-Jean C a l v e t ( P a r i s : P a y o t ) , 222 pp. [ l s t I t . e d . , B a r i 19651.

- . 1970. " I n t r o d u z i o n e a l l a t e r z a e d i t i o n e e addenda". De Mauro,

.
1 9 6 8 , 3rd e d (Bari: L a t e r z a ) , xxiv-xxxix.

D e r o s s i , G i o r g i o . 1965. Segno e s t r u t t u r a Zinguistici nel pensiero d i

Peiodinand de Saussure (Udine: Del Bianco) , 359 pp.
Dietze, Joachim. 1.966. August SchZeicher a l s SZawist: Sein Leben und s e i n
Werk i n der Sicht der Indogermanistik (Berlin: Akad, Verlag), 211 pp.
I

..
Dinneen, Francis P [atrick] , S J 1967. An Introduction t o Genera2 Linguis-
t i c s (New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston), xi + 452 pp.

Doroszewski, Witold. 1958. "Le structuralisme linguistique et les gtudes

de g60graphie dialectale". P [ 8 ] I C L , 540-64. [Discussion, 564-721 .
. 1962. Studia i szkice jezykoznawcze, vol. I (Warsaw: PWN) , 470
PP
Engler, Rudolf. l!j59. "CLG und SM; ein kritische Ausgabe des ours de
.
linguistique gen&ale 'I' Kraty Zos 4 : 119-32 [1960] .
.1962. "~h6orieet critique d 'un principe saussurien: 1'arbi-
traire du signe". CFS 19, 5-66.

. 1964. "~om~l&ments2 l'arbitraire". CFS 21:25-32.

. 1966. "Remarques sur Saussure, son systGme et sa terminologie".
CFS 22:35-40.

. 1967. "Zur Neuausgabe des Cours de linguistique generale"

[Forschungsbericht]. KratyZos 12:113-28 [I9691 .
> .

. 1967ff. Critical ed. of the CLG (Wiesbaden: 0 . Harrassowitz),

tome I (= fasc.1-3), xii + 1030 pp.; tome I1 (scheduled for 1973).
[= CLG (E) ].
.
(ed .) 1968. Lexique de Za temninoZogie saussurienne (~trecht&
Antwerp: Spectrum), 57 pp. [= LTS].

, 1970. "Serniol~~ische
Lese (Betrachtungen zu Saussure, Salviati
.
und ~hrgtiende Troyes)" Homage Buyssens, 61-73.

.
Erlich, Viktor 1969. Russian FormaZism: History - Doctrine 3rd rev ed
. .
(The Hague: Mouton) , 311 pp [lst ed , 19551 .
Firth, John Rupert. 1957. Papers i n ~ i n g u i s t i c s1934 - 1951 on don:
Oxford Univ. Press), x + 233 pp. [= PiL] .

.1968. Selected Papers of J . R. Firth 1952-59. Ed. with an intro-

duction by Frank Robert Palmer (London: Longmans), x + 209 pp.

Gabelentz, Georg von der . 1901. Die Sprachwissenschaft: Ihre Aufgaben,

Methoden und bisherigen Ergebnisse. 2nd rev. ed., prepared by Albrecht
Graf von der Schulenburg (Leipzig: C. H. Tauchnitz; repr. ~ubin~en:
TBL, 1969), 1401 + xxi + 520 pp. [lst ed., 18911.
 . v
Gagkaev, K[azan] E [ g o r o v i z ] 1957. Kurs lek& j po i s t o r i i jazykoznani ja
(Odessa: I z d . O d e s s k i j gosud. Univ .), 154 pp
I
.
Gauger, Hans-Martin. 1970. Wort und Sprache: SprachwissenschaftZiche
Grundfragen ( ~ G b i n ~ e nM:. Niemeyer) , i x + 137 pp .
G l i n z , Hans. 1970. Linguistischf Grundbegriffe und ~ethoden&erblick.
2nd ed. (FrankfurtIM.: Athenaum, 1971), 142 pp.

Godel, Robert. 1957. Les sources manuscrites du Cours de linguistique

ge'ne'raZe de F. de Saussure (Geneva: Droz ; P a r i s : Minard) ; 2nd p r i n t -
i n g 1969, 283 pp. [= SM] .
. 1966. "F. d e S a u s s u r e ' s Theory of ~ a n g u a g e " . Current Trends i n
Linguistics 111, 479-93.

. 1968. 'IF. d e S a u s s u r e e t l e s d g b u t s d e l a l i n g u i s t i q u e aoderne".

Semaine d 'Gtudes ~ e n z v e67 : Enseignement secondaire de demain (Aarau :
~ a u e r l a n d e r,
) 115-24.

Graur, A 1 [exandru] , and L [ u c i a ] Wald. 1965. ~ c u r t zi s t o r i e a Zingvis-

t i c i i . 2nd r e v . ed. (Bucharest: Ed. ? t i i n i i f i c a ) , 182 pp. [ l s t e d . ,
19611.

Gray, Louis H e r b e r t . 1939. Foundations of Language. Repr. w i t h c o r r e c -

t i o n s and a d d i t i o n s , 3 r d p r i n t i n g (New York: Macmillan Comp., 1 9 5 0 ) ,
xiv + 530 pp.

.
Greimas, A [ l g i r d a s ] J [ u l i e n ] 1966. ~ G m a n t i ~ ustructuraZe
e : Recherchz de
mhhode ( P a r i s : Larousse) , 261 pp.

~ g u s l e r ,Frank. 1968. Das Problem Phonetik und PhonoZogie b e i Baudoz~in

de Courtenad und <n seiner NachfoZge (= L i n g u i s t i s c h e S t u d i e n ) ( H a l l e :
Niemeyer), 1 5 1 pp.

Heinimann, S i e g f r i e d . 1967. "Zur Auffassung d e s G e s c h i c h t l i c h e n i n d e r

h i s t o r i s c h e n Grammatik d e s 19. J a h r h u n d e r t s " . Festgabe Hans von
Greyerz .... Ed. by E r n s t Walder, e t a l . (Berne: H . Lang), 783-507.

Helbig, Gerhard. 1970. Geschichte der neueren Sprachwissenschaft: Unter

dem besonderen Aspekt der Grammatik-Theorie ( L e i p z i g : B i b l i o g r a p h i -
s c h e s I n s t . ; Munich: M. Hueber, 1 9 7 1 ) , 392 pp.

B j e l m s l e v , L o u i s . 1959. Essais Zinguistiques. (= TCLC, 1 2 ) (Copenhagen :

E. Munksgaard), 275 pp. [A s e l e c t i o n of p a p e r s w r i t t e n between 1937
and 19571.

. 1970. Langzffige: An Introduction. T r a n s l . by F r a n c i s J [ a m e s ]

W h i t f i e l d (Madison, Wisc. & London: Univ. of Wisconsin P r e s s ) , x i i i +
144 pp. [Dan. o r i g i n a l , Copenhagen 19631.
[Cf. a l s o OSG and PTL i n t h e prelimi.nary p a g e s ] .
Hockett, Charles Francis. 1958. A Course i n Modern Linguistics (New York:
Macmillan), 12th repr. 1967, 621 pp.

. 1965. "Sound Change". Language 41:185-205.

. 1968. The State of the A r t (The Hague: Mouton), 123 pp.

.
~Srmann,Hans. 1967. Psycho Zogie der Sprache 2nd rev. printing (~erlin-
'

Heidelberg-New York: Springer, 1970), xii + 395 pp.

. 1971. PsychoZinguistics : An Introduction t o Research and

I'heory. Transl. by H[ans] H[einrich] Stern ( B i d . ) , lxii + 377 pp.
[= E. transl. of Hirmann, 19671.

Iordan, Iorgu. 1937. An Introduction t o Romance Linguistics: I t s Schoozs

and SchoZms. Transl. by John Orr; 2nd ed. (Oxford: B. Blackwell,
1970), xi + 593 [403] pp. [Rum. original, Jassy, 19321.

. 1962. ~ i n f ; h r m ni~n die Geschichte und Methoden der romanischen

Sprachwissmschaft. Transl. by Werner Bahner (Berlin: Akad. Verlag),
ix + 521 pp.

~vid,Milka. 1965. Trends i n Linguistics. Transl. by Muriel Heppell, 2nd

printing (The Hague: Mouton, 1970), 260 pp. [Serbo-Croatian original,
Ljubljana 19631.

.
Jacob, ~ndr; (comp .) 1969. 100 Points de vue sur Ze Zangage: 270 t e x t e s
choisis e t pr&ent& (Paris: C. Klincksieck) , 637 pp.

Jakobson, Roman. 1960. "~aza6skaszkoka polskiej lingwistyki i jej rciejsce

w iwiatowym rozwoju fonologii". BPTJ 19 :3-34; E. transl. to appear in
R. Jakobson, Selected Writings I1 (The Hague: Mouton, 1971).
.1963. Essais de Zinguistique g&&ale. Transl. and with a pre-
face by Nicolas Ruwet (Paris: Ed. de Minuit), 260 pp.

. 1965. "A la recherche de l'essence du langage". ~ i o ~ z n51e

(= ~robZ&es du Zangage [Paris: Gallimard, 19661) , 22-38. [E. transl .,
IIThe Quest for the Essence of Language". Diogenes 51:21-37 (1965)l.

.1967. "L'importanza di Kruszewski per lo sviluppo della lin-

guistica generale". RSZav 13:3-23 (1965 [1967]). [Pol. version in
Kruszewski, 1967:~-xxv].
[S. also SW I listed in the preliminary pages].
, and Morris Halle. 1956. FundamentaZs of Language (The Hague:
Mouton), 87 pp.

Jespersen, Otto. 1964. Language: I t s Nature and origin (New York: W. W.

Norton & Co.), 444 pp. [lst ed., 19221.
 .
Kacnel 'son, S [olomon] D [avidovir] 1941. Kratki j ozeerk jazykoxnanija
(Leningrad: Izd. Leningradskogo gosud. ~niv.), 72 pp.
I

Koerner, E. F. K. 1970. "Bloomfieldian Linguistics and the Problem of

'Meaning': A Chapter in the History of the Theory and Study of
Language". Jahrbuch fb Amerikastudien (Heidelberg) 15 :162-83.
1
. 1971. "A Note on Transformational-Generative Grammer and the i
I
Saussurean Dichotomy of Synchrony versus ~iachrony".Ling. Berichte
13 :25-32.
4

Kristeva, Julia. 1969. ~ Z m e i o t i k z :Recherches pour une s g m a n a ~ ~ s e

(Paris: Ed. du Seuil), 381 pp.

.
Kronasser , Heinz 1968. Handbuch der Semasio Zogie : Kurze Einfghrung i n
d i e Geschichte, ProbZematik und TerrninoZogie der BedeutungsZehre. 2nd
ed. (Heidelberg: C. Winters), 204 pp. [I.st ed., 19521.

Kruszewski, Miko4aj. i881. Fber d i e ~autabwechsZung (Kazan: ~niversitats-

buchdruckerei) , 41 pp .
. 1883. 0;erk nauki o jazyke (Kazan: Tipografia Imperatorskago
Univ.), 148 pp.; Pol. transl. in Kruszewski, 1967:47-150.

.1884-90. Prinzipien der SprachentwickeZung. Authorized transl.

by Friedrich Techmer of Kruszewski, 1883, published subsequently In
IZAS 1: 295-307 [1884] ; 2: 258 [I8851; 3:16-70 [1887], and 5 :133-44,
339-60 [1890].

.
1967. wyb& pism. Ed. and transl. by Jerzy Kurylowicz and
Krystyna Pomorska, with introd. by J. Kury4owicz and Roman Jakobson
(Breslau-Warsaw-Cracow: PAN), xxv + 172 pp.
[Contains most of Kruszewski's publications in Pol. transl., in
particular Kruszewski, 1881 and 18831.

Kuhn, Thomas S[amuel]. 1970. The Structure of S c i e n t i f i c BevoZutions.

2nd enl. ed. (Chicago: Chicago Univ. Press) , xii + 210 pp [ISt ed., .
19621.

Kukenheim, Louis. 1966. Esquisse historique de Zu Zinguistiqus f r a n p i s e

s t de ses rapports avec Za Z i n p i s t i q u e g&&ale. 2nd rev. and enl.
ed. (Leiden: Univ. Pers), 285 pp. [lst ed., 19621.

Laziczius, Gyula [ = Julius von]. 1966. Selected Writings of G. L . Ed. by

Thomas A[lbert] Sebeok (The Hague: Mouton), 226 pp.

Lehmann, Winfred Philipp (ed.). 1967. A Reader i n nineteenth-Century

HistoricaZ Ida-European Linguistics (Bloomington & London: Indiana
Univ. Press), vi + 266 pp.
Lepschy, G i u l i o C [ i r o ] . 1970. A Survey of Structw~aZLinguistics (London:
.
Faber) , 192 pp [ I t . origina,l, T u r i n 19661 .
Leroy, Maurice. 1967. The Main rends i n Modern ~ i n ~ u i s t i c T s r. a n s l . by
G l a n v i l l e P r i c e (Oxford: B l a c k w e l l ) , x i + 155 pp. [ F r . o r i g i n a l ,
J

B r u s s e l s 19631.

-- . 1971. Les grands courants de Za Zinguistique moderne. 2nd r e v .

ed. ( B r u s s e l s : Ed. d e 1'Univ. d e B r u x e l l e s ) , xv + 210 pp. [ l s t e d . ,
19631.

L i e b , Hans-Heinrich. 1967. "'Synchronic' versus 'Diachronic': A Histor-

i c a l Note". Linguistics 36:18-28.

.
1968. Communication Comptexes and Their Stages: A Contribution
t o a Theory of the Language Stage (The Hague: Mouton), 140 pp.
.
1970. Sprachstadiwn und Spraehsystem: Urnrisse einer Sprach-
theorie (Stuttgart-Berlin-Cologne: Kohlhamqer), x i v + 306 pp.

.
L o j a , J a [ n i s ] ~ [ i l j u m o v i c ] 1968. I s t o r i ja ~ i n ~ v i s t ~ ~ euFeni
s k i jo:
MateriaZy k kursu Zekcij (Moscow: I z d . "Vyssaja Skola") , 308 pp.

L u t h e r , Wilhelm. 1970. Sprachphilosophie aZs Grundwissenschaft: Ihre

Bedeutung fcr die wissenschaftZiche GrundZagenbiZdung und iiio so-
siaZpoZitische Erziehung (Heidelberg: Q u e l l e & Meyer) , 454 pp .
Lyons, John. 1968. Introduction t o Theoretical Linguistics (Cambridge:
Cambridge Univ. P r e s s ) , v i i + 519 pp.

M a l k i e l , Yakov, and Margaret Langdon. 1969. " H i s t o r y and H i s t o r i e s of

L i n g u i s t i c s " . RPh 22:530-74.

Malmberg, B e r t i l . 1964. New Trends i n Linguistics. T r a n s l . by Edward

Carney (Stockholm & Lund: Naturmetodens ~ p r z k i n s t i t u t ) ,v + 226 pp.
[Swedish o r i g i n a l , Stockholm 19591.

. 1968. Les nouueZZes tendances de Za Zinguistique. T r a n s l . from

t h e Swedish by J a c q u e s Gengoux, 2nd r e v . e d . ( P a r i s : PUF), 339 pp.
[ l s t F r . e d . , 19661.

M a r t i n e t , ~ n d r 6 . 1964. Economie des changernents phon5tiques: ~ r a i t ;de

phonoZogie dinchronique. 2nd e d . ; 3 r d ed. (Berne: A . F r a n c k e , 1 9 7 0 ) ,
396 pp. [ l s t e d . , 19551.

. 1967. ~Z&nentsde Zinguistique gt&&ale. New r e v . and er.1. ed.

( P a r i s : A . C o l i n ) , 217 pp. [ l s t e d . , 19601.

.1968. La Linguistique synchronique: Etudes e t recherches. 2nd

ed. ( P a r i s : PUF), 246 pp. [ l s t e d . , 19651.
Meier , Georg Friedrich. 1961. Das 25~0-problemi n der Linguistik: K r i t i -
sche Untsrsuchungen zur strukturalistischen AnaZyse der ReZevanz
sprachlicher Form (= Schriftbn zur Phonetik, Sprachwissenschaft und
K o m u n i k a t i o n s f o r s c I ~ u n g , 2) (Berlin: Akad. Verlag) , 249 pp. [~iblio-
graphy, 182-2491.

.
Miller, Robert L [eel 1968. The Linguistic Rezativity Principle and
HwnboZdtian EthnoZinguistics: A Histor3 and Appraisal (The Hague:
Mouton), 128 pp.

Mounin, Georges. 1967. Histoire de Za Zinguistique: Des origines au xf

s&Ze (Paris : PUF) , 226 pp.

. P
1968. Sauaswe ou Ze structuraZist, sazs Ze savoir (Paris:
Seghers), 191 pp.

Mourelle-Lena, Manuel. 1969. "The Geneva School of Linguistics: A Bio-

graphical Record". Geneva SchooZ Reader, 1-25.

Ortigues, Edmond . 1962. Le Discours e t Ze symboZe (Aubier : Ed. Montaigne) ,

229 pp.

.
~ztsch,Gertrud 1955. Grundfragen der SprachtheoYie (~alle/S.: M .
Niemeyer), viii + 181 pp.

Pariente, Jean-Claude (ed. & introd.). 1969. Essais sur Ze Zangage:

Textes de E. ~ a s s i r e r ,A. Seehehuge, W . Doroszewski, K. ~iilzZera, e t c .
(Paris: Ed. de Minuit), 345 pp.

Paul, Hermann. 1909. Prinzipien der Sprachgesehichte. 4th ed.; 5th and
subsequent eds. (~Gbin~en: M. Niemeyer, 1970), xv + 428 pp. [lst ed.,
18801.

Pedersen, Holger. 1962. The Discovery of Language: ~ i n g u i s t i cScience i n

the 29th Ccntmcy. Transl. by John W[ebster] Spargo (Bloomington:
Indiana Univ. Press), vi + 360 pp. [Dan. original, Copenhagen 19241.

Piaget, Jean. 1968. Le structmaZisme. 3rd printing (Paris : PUF), 128 pp.

Posner, Rebecca. 1370. "Thirty Years on". Supplement to 1ordan/0rrY

1937; 2nd ed. (Oxford: B. Blackwell) , 393-593.

Putschke, Wolfgang. 1969. "Zur forschungsgeschichtlichen Stellung der

junggrammatischen Schule". ZDL 1:19-48.

Rey, Alain (comp ) . . 1970. La LexicoZog-ie: Lectures (Paris : C . Klinck-

sieck) , 323 pp.

.
Robins, R[obert] H[enry] 1951. Ancient and MediazvaZ Grammaticaz Theory
i n Europe with PaztieuZar Reference t o Modern .Linguistic Doctrines
(London: G . Bell & Sons), vii + 104 pp.
Robins, R[obert] H[enry]. 1964. General ~ i n g u i s t i c s :An I n t r o d u c t o q
Swvey. 2nd rev. ed. (London: Longmans, 1971), xxii + 398 pp.
I

.1967. A Short History of Linguistics ( I b i d . & Bloomington,

Ind.: Indiana Univ. Press, 1968), viii + 248 pp.
. 1970. Diversions of BZoomsbury : Se Zected W-etings
p , vii
tics (Amsterdam: North-Holland Publ. ~ o m .) + 376 pp.
on ~ i n g u i s -

Salus , Peter H [enry] (comp .) . 1969. On Lanpage : PZato t o uon ~wnboZdt

(New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston), v + 201 pp.

Saussure, Ferdinand de. 1894. 'Appraisal of W. D. Whitneyl.Manuscript,

to appear in FdS: Notes ingdites personneZZes ed. by Rudolf Engler
(Wiesbaden: 0. Harrassowitz, 1972).

.
1954. "Notes in6dites de F. de ~aussure".Ed. by Robert Godel.
CFS 12:49-71. [Excerpts from autograph manuscripts written 1891-19111 .

.
1957. "Cours de linguistique g&6rale (1908-1909) : introductioni'.
Ed. by Robert Godel. ,rFS 15:6-103. [Introd., 3-51.
[S. also CLG, CLG(E), LTS, Recueit, and SM in the preliminary pages].

Schaff, Adam. 1969. ~ i n f d 2 h r u ni ~n die Semantik. Transl. by Liselotte and

Alois Hermann, with an epilogue by Georg Klaus (Frankfurt/M.: Euro-
.
pEi sche Verlagsanstalt ; Vienna: Europa Verlag) , 330 pp [pol. original,
1960; 1st G. transl., 19661.

Schogt, Henry G[ilius]. 1966. "Baudouin de Courtenay and Phonological

Analysis". Linguistique 2.2:15-29.

Sechehaye, (Charles) Albert. 1908. Progrume e t mecthodes de Za Zinguis-

tique thgorique: PsychoZogie du Zangage (Paris: H . Champion; Leipzig:
0. Harrassowitz; Geneva: A. Eggimann & Co.), 267 pp.

.1927. "~'Gcolegenevoise de linguistique g&-&ale". IF

44:217-41.

Specht, Franz. 1948. "Die 'indogermanische' Sprachwissenschaft von den

Junggrammatikern bis zum ersten Weltkriege". Lexis 1:229-63.

Strunk, Klaus. 1965. "Probleme der idg. Sprachwissenschaft nach ~rugmann".

G Z o t t ~(~Gttin~en)
43:199-217.

Tagliavini, Carlo. 1963. Panorama d i s t o r i a deZZa Zinguistica. New ed.

(Bologna: R. ~itron,1968), x + 426 pp.

~arngczi,Laurent. 1970. "Essai. de critique au structuralisme linguis-

ti.que actuel". Linguistics 57 :60-92.
Telegdi, Zsigmond. 1967. "Struktur und Geschichte: Zur Auffassung ihres
.
~erhgltnissesin der ~~rachwissenschaft"ALHung 17:223-43,

Terracini, A[ron] ~[envenuto]. 1949. Guida aZZo studio deZZa Zinguistica

storica (Rome: Ed. dell'hteneo), 275 pp.
"
.
Trubetzkoy [= Trubeckoj, Knjaz ' I , N[ikolaj] S [ergeevic] 1949. Principes
de phonoZogie. Transl. by ~[ean]Cantineau, new ed. (Paris: C. Klinck-
sieck, 1967), xxxiv -t- 396 pp.

. 1967. Grundxiige der ~honoZogie. 4th ed

. . .
. (~ktingen:Vandenhoeck
& Ruprecht) , 297 pp [lst ed , Prague 19391

Ungeheuer, Gerold. 1969. "Zum arbitrgren Charakter des sprachlichen

Zeichens: Ein Beitrag zum ~erhgltnisvon synchronischer und ahistori-
scher Betrachtungsweise in der Linguistiktt.Sprache der Gegemlart V,
65-77.

.
Vachek, Josef 1966. The Linguistic SchooZ of Prague : An Introduction ,,
t o I t s Theory and Practice (London & Bloomington, Ind.: Indiana Univ.
Press), viii + 184 pp.

Vallini, Cristina. 1969. "Problemi di metodi in Ferdinand de Saussure

indoeuropeanista". SSL 9:l-85; publ. also separately (Pisa: P.
Mariotti, 1969), 85 pp.

Van gamel, h[nton] G[erardus]. 1945. Geschiedenis der taaZwetenschup.

(The Hague: Servire), 94 pp.

.
Varvaro , Alberto 1966. Storia, prob Zemi 8 metodi de Z Za Zinguistica
romanza. New ed. (Naples: Liguori, 1968), 273 pp.

Vendryes , Joseph. 1921. Le Zangage : Introduction Zinguistique ?L 2 '

h i s t o i r e (Paris: La Renaissance du iivre); repr., with additions,
(Paris: Michel, 1923), 461 pp.; 2nd ed., 1950, with minor changes and
bibliographical additions, xxviii i447 pp.

.
1952, Choiz d'ikudes Zinguistiqtles e t ceZtiques (Paris: C .
Klincksieck), 350 pp.

Wein, Hermann. 1963. Sprachphilosophie deer Gegenwart: Eine ~ i n f G h ~ u n g

i n ezirop3ische 2nd merikanische SprachphiZosophie des 20. Jahr-
hunderts (The Hague: M . Nijhoff) , 84 pp.

.
Wartburg, Walther von 1970. ~ i n f c h r u v li ~n die ~robzernatikund Methodik
. .
der Sprachwissenschaft 3rd ed , arranged by Gustav Ineichen (~Gbin~en :
M. Niemeyer), viii + 248 pp. [lst ed., 19431.
Waterman, John T[homas]. 1970. Perspectives i n Linguistics: An AcCoW'Zt
of the Background o f Modem Einguistics. 2nd rev. ed, (Chicago:
Chicago Univ. Press), viif 4- 119 pp. [lst ed., 19631.
Zeller, Otto. 1967. ProbZemgeschichte der vergZeichenden (indoge-i-
schen) ~prachwissenschaft (Osnabrikk: Biblio ~erlag), 151 PP.
.
Zvegincev, v [ ladicir] ~[ndreevic] 1964-65. Isto& ja jazykoznan~jaXIX
11Prosvescenie") . .
i XX v e & p v ocerkm i i z v ~ e F e n i j m .2 vols , 3rd ed. (Moscow: I d

Zwirner, Eberhard. 1969. "Zu Herkunft und Funktion des Begriffspaares

Synchronie - ~iachronie".@razhe der Gegenwart V, 30-51.

, andKurt Zwirner. 1966. G r u n d f ~ a ~ eder

n ~honometrie. 2nd rev.
and enl. ed. (= Phonometrie I) (Base1 & New York: S. ~arger), 218
pp. [lst ed., Berlin 19361.