Saussure and Derrida

A science that studies the life of signs within society is conceivable; . . . I shall call it semiology (from Greek semeion ‘sign'). Semiology would show what constitutes signs, what laws govern them. Since the science does not yet exist, no one can say what it would be. . . . (Saussure, 1960:16) In this statement Ferdinand de Saussure (1857-1913), the twentieth-century father of the science of signs, presents his theory about language and gives a Greek name. This enterprise has considerably affected most discussions about language and of interpretation since its inauguration. Saussure presents the linguistic system as the place of the sign. Signs don't exist apart from a system. And it is every time a system of differences. Unavoidably, the theory of signs leads Saussure to the theory of language as system. Later, Jacques Derrida (1930-2004) discovers the logocentric dynamic in Saussure's new theory. Referring to the father of structural linguistics and semiology, Derrida leads readers beyond Saussure toward a poststructuralist future. It is this logocentrism which, limiting the internal system of language in general by a bad abstraction, prevents Saussure and the majority of his successors from determining fully and explicitly that which is called ‘the integral and concrete object of linguistics† (Cours 23). Both Ferdinand de Saussure – father of 20th-century linguistics and Jacques Derrida – founder of deconstruction made profound impact upon language theory; their ideas laid the basis for considerable developments in linguisti cs in the 20th century. Saussure on Language In itself, thought is like a swirling cloud, where no shape is intrinsically determinate. No ideas are established in advance, and nothing is distinct, before the introduction of linguistic structure. [†¦] Just as it is impossible to take a pair of scissors and cut one side of paper without at the same time cutting the other, so it is impossible in a language to isolate sound from thought, or thought from sound. To separate the two for theoretical purposes takes us into either pure psychology or pure phonetics, not linguistics. Linguistics, then, operates along this margin, where sound and thought meet. The contact between them gives rise to a form, not a substance (Cours 155-7). This impressive statement from the posthumously published Cours de linguistique generale of Ferdinand de Saussure (1857-1913) introduces readers in what was later called as a ‘Copernican revolution' in Western thought relating to language. Why ‘Copernican’? Because just as Copernicus had asserted that the Earth revolved around the Sun, instead of the Sun revolving around the Earth, Saussure asserts something similar on the subject of language. His theory claimed that languages are the instruments that give human beings opportunity to achieve a rational understanding of the world in which they live. Rather than considering words as mere addition to human comprehension of reality, Saussure considered comprehension of reality as depending substantially upon human use of the verbal signs that form the language people use. Language is not secondary but, quite the reverse, central to human life. As a result, human life is linguistically constructed life. Saussure's theory goes far beyond the traditional theory of language as something communicated. It also goes beyond Locke's theory of words as symbols that stand for ideas. Many linguistic philosophers had claimed that without language human reason would be lacking its principal instrument of transformation ideas into words. But Saussure's theory goes further and deeper. Saussure indicates the phonetic and conceptual aspects of language. Linguistics was for Saussure only one subdivision of a relating to various branches science of signs that he proposed to call ‘semiology' (semiologie). Each branch of semiology had a theory of the signs which it studied. Consequently, linguistics would need a theory of the linguistic sign, the fundamental unit of langue. Such a theory of language Saussure proceeds to offer. As his paper-cutting analogy shows, he deals with the linguistic sign as a unit determined merely by its form. Its form has two facets, or ‘opposite sides'. The Saussurean technical identifications for these two facets of the sign are signifiant and signifie (the ‘signifying' plane and the ‘signified' plane) (Matthews 21). Every langue includes semiological system of bi-planar signs. Each sign has its signifiant and its signifie. Despite the fact that each plane may, for convenience, be analyzed one by one, no linguistic sign can be determined without considering both planes that are equally important. The published in 1916 text of the Cours faithfully reflects Saussure's theory about language. That text became the subsequent chapter in the history of ideas about language theory. The text became a cornerstone of modern linguistic theory, as well as the public declaration of a more general intellectual movement of the 20th century that had effect on such diverse disciplines as psychology, social anthropology and literary criticism. This all-round movement is today known as ‘structuralism'. The whole question that the Saussurean theory of linguistic structure gives rise is this: ‘If our langue is a structure, then a structure of what exactly? ‘ (Matthews 69) Saussure's answer to this question is problematic. He identified langue as being at the same time a structure of the mental operations of the human beings, and also a structure of the communicational processes by means of which human beings perform their roles as a cultural constitution. So langue is finally supra-individual in the relation that it is placed in society and depends for its existence on cultural relations; yet it assumes in each individual the power of an internally created system of linguistic signs. More exactly, langue, Saussure claims, ‘is never complete in any single individual, but exists perfectly only in the collectivity' (Cours 30). Derrida’s Theory of Language The theory of language to which Derrida wants to turn attention is connected with the method linguistic meaning is produced. More exactly, the method what there is of linguistic meaning and nonmeaning in their interconnection is presented. Derrida, in his theory of deconstruction, presents the same structure for both the process of nonaesthetic negativity and the process of aesthetic negativity. â€Å"Deconstruction† is connected with an analysis of the theory of language that, similar to the process of aesthetic negativity, discovers within this theory the seeds of its own downfall. Derrida presents a theory of meaning that reflects the idea of the â€Å"iterability† of signs and what he calls their â€Å"supplementary† status. Jonathan Culler summarized Derrida's central idea in this regard in the following way: Our earlier formula, â€Å"meaning is context-bound, but context is boundless,† helps us recall why both projects fail: meaning is context-bound, so intentions do not in fact suffice to determine meaning; context must be mobilized. But context is boundless, so accounts of context never provide full determinations of meaning. Against any set of formulations, one can imagine further possibilities of context, including the expansion of context produced by reinscription within a context of the description of it (Menke 96). Considering Culler's interpretation, Derrida's thesis of the uncircumventable proclivity of language for crisis is based on the difference between what one expects context to offer and what it can really do, when correctly viewed. The nonetheless inevitable recourse to context in the determination of meaning thus results in a crisis for every attempt to comprehend language. What is supposed to generate definitiveness is itself unlimited and thus the source of unmanaged difference. Derrida’s general thesis thus is based on the idea that the understanding of the meaning of signs can only function in a context-bound way. At the same time that contexts cannot define the meaning of signs since they are themselves boundless. The boundlessness that meaning opens itself to in its context-boundedness is in no way eo ipso the boundlessness of a difference that is inconsistent with any identity of meaning (Menke 90). Derrida himself realizes his argument that a â€Å"thousand possibilities will always remain open even if one understands something in this phrase that makes sense† (Menke 96) in an equivocal fashion. On the one hand this idea means: every sign can function in different and boundlessly many contexts. This is precisely what determines the iterability of signs: their reusability in contexts that are not actually those in which they were first placed. The usability of signs in boundlessly many contexts in itself, though, in no way is opposite to the definitiveness of its use and meaning as determined by rules of language. Although one might note, with Derrida, that the deconstruction of logocentrism is a search for â€Å"the other of language† (Derrida 1984, 123), this does not contribute to the statement that deconstruction is originally concerned with a linguistic theory. This is first and foremost the question of the concrete instance, of â€Å"the other, which is beyond language† (Derrida 1984,123). Far, then, from being a philosophy that according to its critics, states that there is nothing beyond language and that one is confined within language, deconstruction can be considered as a response. â€Å"Deconstruction is, in itself, a positive response to an alterity which necessarily calls, summons or motivates it. Deconstruction is therefore vocation – a response to a call† (Derrida 1984,118). Derrida claims that the character of deconstruction is not solely positive, that is not merely an assertion of what already exists and is known, but that it is an assertion of what is wholly other (tout autre) (Derrida 1992, 27). Derrida claims that difference is not something that can appear in logocentric discourse: â€Å"differance is not,† Derrida explains, â€Å"preceded by the originary and indivisible unity of a present possibility that I could reserve†¦. What defers presence, on the contrary, is the very basis on which presence is announced or desired in what represents it, its sign, its trace†¦. Differance is â€Å"that which produces different things, that which differentiates, is the common root of all the oppositional concepts that mark our language†¦ † (Positions, 89). Differance is neither structure nor origin, â€Å"such an alternative itself being an ‘effect' of differance. † Even so, studying the operations of differance requires that the writer use such concepts as structure and origin and â€Å"borrow the syntaxic and lexical resources of the language of metaphysics† even if the writer wishes to deconstruct this language ( Positions, pp. -10). Derrida indicates that differance is not an origin. Neither language nor writing springs in differance. Instead, Derrida says, differance allows the play of absence and presence, writing and thought, structure and force by means of which the question of origin comes to know itself. Saussure and Derrida Exactly at this point one is faced with one of the most problematic though fascinating dimensions of Derrida's theory. The problem, stated above, is that, as soon as it is recognized that there are no simple, unsignified, transcendental signifiers that fix and warrant the meaning of the words, that there exist no originals to which the words can be attributed, one comes to conditions where even this acknowledgement itself seems to have become â€Å"floating† (May 125). Derrida resolves this difficult situation with the help of above discussed theory of signs and of language developed by Ferdinand de Saussure. Despite the idea that language is in a fundamental way a naming process, attaching words to things, Saussure had claimed that language is a system, or a structure. In the structure any individual element is meaningless outside the boundaries of that structure. In language, he asserts, there are only differences. But – and here the ideas of Saussure are basic for Derrida's deconstruction of the metaphysics of presence – these differences are not differences between positive terms, that is between terms that in and by themselves are connected with objects or things outside the system. Accordingly, in language, Saussure indicates, there are only differences without positive terms (May 127). But if this is true, if there are no positive terms, then it means that one can no longer define the differential position of language itself by means of a positive term either. Difference without positive terms indicates that this dimension must itself always be left unperceived for, roughly speaking, it is unconceptualizable. It is a difference that cannot be returned into the order of the same and, through a signifier, given individual characteristics. This suggests, then, that â€Å"the play of difference, which, as Saussure reminded us, is the condition for the possibility and functioning of every sign, is in itself a silent play† (Derrida 1982, 5). If, however, one wants to articulate that – one must first of all admit that there can never be a word or a concept to correspond to this silent play. One must also admit that this play cannot merely be exposed, for â€Å"one can expose only that which at a certain moment can become present† (Derrida 1982, 5). And one must ultimately admit that there is nowhere to begin, â€Å"for what is put into question is precisely the quest for a rightful beginning, an absolute point of departure† (Derrida 1982, 6). All this, and more, is acknowledged in the new â€Å"word† or â€Å"concept† – â€Å"which is neither a word nor a concept† (Derrida 1982:7) but a â€Å"neographism† (Derrida 1982:13) – of differance. The motive why Derrida uses â€Å"what is written as difference† (Derrida 1982, 11) is not difficult to understand. For although â€Å"the play of difference† (Derrida 1982, 11) is introduced as something for the opportunity of all conceptuality, one should not make the mistaken opinion to think that one has finally discovered the real origin of conceptuality. That, expressing the same idea but differently, this play is a playful but despite that transcendental signified. Strictly speaking, in order to avoid this mistake one must acknowledge that the differences that make up the play of difference â€Å"are themselves effects† (Derrida 1982:11, original emphasis). As Derrida claims, What is written as differance, then, will be the playing movement that â€Å"produces† – by means of something that is not simply an activity – these differences, these effects of difference. This does not mean that the differance that produces differences is somehow before them, in a simple and unmodified – in-different – present. Differance is the non-full, non-simple, structured and differentiating origin of differences. Thus, the name â€Å"origin† no longer suits. (Derrida 1982, 11) Although differance is straightforwardly connected with a structuralist idea of meaning – that Derrida recognizes when he indicates that he sees no reason to question the truth of what Saussure proposes (Derrida 1976, 39), there is one important aspect in which differance is outside the scope of structuralism. The point here is that Derrida clearly refuses to accept the primary character of structure itself. Structure is not a transcendental represented (for which reason Derrida notes that he does not want to question the truth of what Saussure proposes â€Å"on the level on which he says it [original emphasis] â€Å"but does want to question the logocentric way in which Saussure says it (Derrida 1976, 39). Structure is even less the effect of an original presence coming before and causing it (Derrida 1978, 278-9). What differance tries to express is the differential character of the â€Å"origin† of structure itself. It is in this relation that one might observe that Derrida's writing is poststructural. To some degree, surely, differance appears when Saussure's examination of how language operates. â€Å"In language,† Saussure indicates, â€Å"there are only differences. Even more important: a difference generally implies positive terms between which the difference is set up; but in language there are only differences without positive terms† (Positions, 120). Derrida's differance in an obvious manner is like Saussure's differences. At the end of Positions, for instance, Derrida specifies â€Å"as differance the movement according to which language, or any other code, any system of reference in general, is constituted ‘historically' as a tissue of differences† (Positions, 104). But Derrida makes an effort to go further. Whereas Saussure considers the differences in a semiotic system as the set of constantly changing relationships the speaker manipulates in order to produce meaning, Derrida defines differance as the boundless disappearance of either an origin of or a final place for meaning. When Derrida describes differance, he always does so by examining what it is not. Rather than considering language in the traditional way, as a set of external signs of already farmed internal thoughts (characteristic of â€Å"logocentrism†), Derrida, like Saussure and modern linguistics, thinks of users of language producing coded, that is, repeatable, marks or traces that originate from within certain unities of meaning as â€Å"effects† of the code. These traces are not fundamentally meaningful in themselves but â€Å"arbitrary† and â€Å"conventional† (Menke 96). Thus there is no difference whether one says â€Å"rex,† â€Å"rol,† or â€Å"king† so long as â€Å"we† – those who share these conventions – can tell the difference between rex and lex, roi and loi, and king and sing (Menke 96). The meaning – is a process of the difference, of the distance or the â€Å"spacing† between the traces, what is called, in an absolutely serious way, the â€Å"play† of differences or traces. By the â€Å"play of differences† Derrida defines the differential spacing, the recognized distance, the recognized (heard, seen) intervals between traces first analyzed in structural linguistics (Menke 97). Conclusion A comprehensive historical examination of deconstruction would necessarily include numerous precursors and forerunners: Freud, Hegel, Heidegger, Husserl, Lacan, Levi-Strauss, Marx, Nietzsche, Saussure. . . . However, it can be said that the history of contemporary deconstruction begins with Jacques Derrida De la grammatologie (1967) that opens with a critique of Saussure. Saussure’s theory of language is here framed within a metaphysical system that extends from Plato and Aristotle to Heidegger and Levi-Strauss. By Derrida this theory is called â€Å"logocentric. † Saussure marks a concluding stage of the long logocentric epoch. Derrida indicates that logocentrism imposed itself upon the world and controlled the theory of language. Derrida’s contributions laid ground for future epoch. In the role of prophet, Derrida concludes his â€Å"Exergue† indicating: â€Å"The future can only be anticipated in the form of an absolute danger. It is that which breaks absolutely with constituted normality and can only be proclaimed, presented, as a sort of monstrosity. For that future world and for that within it which will have put into question the values of sign, word, and writing, for that which guides our future anterior, there is as yet no exergue† (Derrida 1967).

Discipline in School

Discipline is very important in a civilized life. Discipline can be defined as control over one's desires and obedient' to codes of behavior. If there is no discipline, there is confusion everywhere. Discipline is of great importance in school and at home. If there is no discipline in schools, it is not possible to imp education effectively. It is necessary to maintain law an order in the society. There should be discipline at home also. Children must be taught self-control. Parents themselves should keep discipline. Children should be taught the value discipline in childhood.A country cannot face extern wars if its armed forces are not disciplined . Unfortunately, there are not much discipline today schools, colleges and government offices. That is w India is facing many problems . Discipline is necessary for people in all walks folia Students studying in schools and colleges, Define personnel, industrial workers – all must have disciple Only then a nation can progress| A stu dent needs to be very punctual to his routine. He should be very regular and sincere to his studies. He should be hard working.He should always be ready and active in various other extracurricular activities. He should remain active and smart. He should learn how to face difficult situations and how to win over them. A student is the future of the country. It is he who has to take the responsibility of the country. He should be healthy and fit. Physical education is as important for students as to be studious and sincere at studies. A student should always be in good health and fitness. For this he should get up early in the morning. He should take exercise daily. He should play game of his choice daily.It is well known that a healthy body has a healthy mind. He is mind will be strong and sharp only when he is physically strong, fit and healthy. The biggest task of a student is to study. A student should be very devoted and sincere to his studies. He should be very punctual. He shou ld know the importance of time. He should regularly do his home work. He should have an urge to learn new things. He should have respect for his teachers and elders. He should be very cooperative with his friends. He should help the needy. Discipline demands self-control and dedication.One who cannot control himself cannot control others. He has to dedicate his individuality in the larger interest of society. Discipline is a virtue. It needs to be cultivated from early childhood. It cannot be developed overnight. It takes time and requires patience. When discipline is enforced, it fails to bring the desired result. True essence of discipline is lost when it is enforced . Student life is the formation period of life. The foundation of adulthood is laid down during the time. The man grows with the habits and manners acquired at that time. These things hardly change.So a student should be much disciplined in his student life. One who is disciplined raises high in life. Life of great me n is examples of discipline. The great men have made mark in their lives, because they strictly follow their goals with all the earnestness and sincerity. So, we should try to be disciplined from the early stage of life. Both at school and at home they should be made to follow the rules of discipline. Parents, teachers and elders have significant role to play. A student should always learn good habits. This will lead to the formation of a good society and nation as well. |

The Fall of Enron Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

The Fall of Enron - Essay Example It was 1985 when Kenneth Lay’s Houston Natural Gas merged with Nebraskan-Northern Natural Gas Company’s holding company, InterNorth, to form Enron. The two separate companies were primarily dealing with the distribution and transmission of oil and electricity in the United States of America. They were also active in the construction, development and maintenance of power plants, pipelines and other similar infrastructure worldwide (Wikipedia, 2006). Under the new company name, Lay was appointed as the Chief Executive Officer and wanted to expand Enron’s market share as he had envisioned for his former venture. Houston Natural Gas had previously been in the business of generating their revenues from junk bonds from which its proceeds were used in the formation of Enron. Kenneth Lay aimed at becoming the biggest player in the energy sector through successful trade earnings from futures contracts (NPR, 2006). To his advantage, Spectrum 7, an oil-well concern welcomed a partnership with Enron a year after its creation. Spectrum 7 was headed by George W. Bush, son of the then-Vice President George H. W. Bush. With falling gas prices in the mid 1980’s, Enron and other gas firms vigorously lobbied for deregulation. The deregulation action came into effect when buyers switched to the cheaper alternative – fuel oil. No doubt fluctuating gas prices allowed Enron to start marketing gas futures; securing gas prices at later date promised to their stakeholders. Similarly, the company lobbied once again for electricity just before selling electric power futures contracts (NPR, 2006). From then on, Enron was aggressive in expanding its services in the water utility sector by creating Azurix that partly collapsed on the NYSE in 1999 and shut down operations in 2001 (Wikipedia, 2006). Jeffery Skilling was hired in 1990 to lead the new division – Enron

Interview Article Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words - 2

Interview - Article Example In the budget, the expected needs of each department in the institution are outlined and matched with the existing resources. In addition, budgeting makes the decision-making process expeditious as all capital structure decisions are always made during budgeting. It is paramount to note that the budget instrument is the only recognized tool for communicating financial requirements to the funders of public institutions. Apart from internal organizations that influence the budgeting process, there exist external forces that determine the allotment in each department. In this case, these forces usually influence the budgeting process by making recommendations and distributing circulars that dictate on various items in the budget statement. It should be noted that public institutions are mainly funded from the public coffer and hence the entire budgeting process is often subjected too much oversight and supervision. Apart from the oversight practices, the board of directors managing a given institution seeks to their interests in the budget. Their main interest is to influence and to have control over the fee pooled from the learner. In this case, the independence of the budgeting officers is not guaranteed. When filling vacant positions in the budgeting offices, all interested parties in a given institution often feel comfortable when their choices are picked. In this case, there exist situations where some candidates with good credentials miss these vacancies. For the obvious reason, every interested party seeks to have people they are comfortable with on budgeting table. History always exonerates diligent officials who occupy budgeting offices at any given time. In most case, the end products justify the process used. In this case, when an institution is hard hit by bad economic time, the budgeting office carries all the blame. Going with the history, many budgets fail to

Instigation of the hostage crisis of 1979 Essay

Instigation of the hostage crisis of 1979 - Essay Example The Iran Hostage Crisis began on November 4, 1979; when the pro Ayatollah students broke into the US embassy in Iran and took about 66 90 people hostage, of which 66 were Americans. Thirteen hostages were later freed, bringing the number down to 53. Almost all of these 13 hostages released were believed to be African-American women, who in their view had a history of oppression by the very country they were citizens of . Another hostage was later released in 1980 bringing the total number of hostages held down to 52. The hostages were finally set free after 444 days on 21st January 1981.This coincided with the inaugural address of President Ronald Reagan. There are several questions that are being asked on what could have been the actual cause of the attack on the US embassy in Tehran by the pro Ayatollah students. There are varied views on what could have motivated them into the act. No need to start a new paragraph. The topic has not changed. You open a new paragraph only when you switch to a new topic. It is generally said that the acceptance of Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi in New York may have been the cause of the crisis. Despite the acceptance of Shah into US soil being taken to be the immediate cause of the attack, the hostage taking was actually motivated by much more than Shah’s acceptance. Even though, on the surface, Shah's acceptance into the U.S. soil was alleged to be the main cause behind the hostage crisis, the real reasons behind the motivation ran much deeper than that. This The hostage crisis was an avenue hence used as front by that the participants in the act used to make their displeasure known and to show t hat they were breaking away from the past where the Americans had been interfering with the Iran’s internal affairs by supporting the Shah.

Yahoo v. The French Guys Our 1st Amendment Rights In Cyberspace Assignment

Yahoo v. The French Guys Our 1st Amendment Rights In Cyberspace - Assignment Example Although it may be difficult to uphold the First Amendment rights of freedom of speech across the globe, the foreign legal rules can favor individual states if they have appropriate structures. Another way in which the First Amendment rights of freedom of speech on the internet can be implemented to comply with the foreign legal rules is through the editing of the search results. This implies that only information pertaining to the provisions of the foreign legal rules is shown, while the prohibited ones are denied access (Lasar, 2011). This shall help in the regulation of illegal information that authorities do not want their citizens to access. For instance, the Chinese government has prohibited the use of foreign websites in order to uphold the freedom of speech among the local citizens. This also makes it easier for the Chinese government to promote local content submissions that are distributed by the law-abiding service providers. The foreign-based websites must be able to operate with the local firms in order to understand the legal frameworks applicable on the internet (Lasar,

Answer 2 discussion questions and write a 2-3 page paper from uploaded Research

Answer 2 discussion questions and write a 2-3 page from uploaded information - Research Paper Example Therefore, one strongly believes that it is possible that there are customers who visit these two stores, as evident from the example indicated herein. Chapter 12: Discussion Question 9 For instance, if one would like to establish a new restaurant, the restaurant or food service industry should be evaluated in terms current status and condition of the market. As such an external analysis should be made of the market’s customers, competitors, suppliers, and potential partners (Spulber, 2009). In addition, the potential entrant must be able to assess and comprehensibly evaluate current competitors that are firmly entrenched in the market, their core competencies, strategies applied, and the clientele that they specifically cater to. Therefore, the strategies that must be designed to effectively compete with incumbent firms are as follows: (1) determine the strengths and weaknesses of these competitors. As emphasized, â€Å"companies should concentrate their strength against the weaknesses of their competitors† (Spulber, 2009, p. ... Likewise, if the incumbent firms exhibit cost advantages, the potential entrant could design strategies which include â€Å"process innovation, increased efficiency, outsourcing, and contracts with customers† (Spulber, 2009, p. 372). In addition, the potential entrant could also apply entry strategies to address differentiation advantages through focusing on product innovation and tailoring the services or products offered to the needs, demands, and preferences of customers. Also, the potential entrant could apply entry strategies which address transaction advantages of competitors through â€Å"innovation in transaction technology, development of new forms of transactions, and creation of new combinations of buyers and sellers† (Spulber, 2009, p. 372), as deemed necessary. Therefore, expected challenges that the potential entrant could face include: immediate response and reaction from the competitors; being recognized in the market through the application of strategie s involving the 4Ps; as well as in designing the most appropriate and effective entry strategy according to the core competencies, advantages, and strengths which would cater to the needs, demands, and preferences of the clientele. As such, selection of the most appropriate entry strategy would actually depend on the positioning of the potential entrant; meaning, to which particular market segment they aim to serve. This would specifically determine the competitors or incumbent which the potential entrant should assess; and apply the most needed entry strategy depending on the core competencies and advantages exhibited by these competitors. 2. Essay: What are the key cost drivers and determinants of cost advantage needed by managers when using a price leadership strategy? Students should be