Want to support the channel? Now you can! 💸 Patreon: patreon.com/thelivingphilosophy ☕️ ko-fi.com/thelivingphilosophy ⌛ Timestamps: 0:00 Introduction 1:45 Diachronic vs Synchronic 3:01 Langue vs Parole 6:06 Sign: Signifiers and Signifieds 8:40 Arbitrary Language 12:04 Language: Differences & Relations 13:37 Summary

I'm a Linguistics student and this is one of the most efficient videos in this area. Your voice, toning is so affective. Thank you so much sir.

@FathiaAdewuni

2 ай бұрын

How does it feel to be a linguist??

The Living Philosophy has been steadily improving with every video. He presents the ideas at a good level of depth, without distracting tangents. He's getting better and better at the rhythm and pacing within each video. And he seems to have a great grasp of not just the material, but what's cool about it and how to convey that. So thank you, The Living Philosophy, for helping me rekindle my love of philosophy.

@TheLivingPhilosophy

2 жыл бұрын

This means more to me than I can say xinlo I am delighted to hear that my work has rekindled some passion for philosophy and I really appreciate your perspective on the quality of the channel improving thank you so much

I love this stuff. Remind me to tell you about the guy I met in a coffee shop in Newport Beach, who was studying for his PhD with a thesis that involved Kierkegaard. It was not on semiotics, but along lines of thought and ideas that I find interesting, if not fascinating. I could not stop asking him questions. He finally told me nicely to get lost because he needed to study. He was a big dude. I apologized for pestering him relentlessly, but I realized that the topic interested me.

Pedntic quibble aside, this is an excellent explanation of Saussure' semiology and for the first time for me, I can see a contiguity between this linguistic one and with the logical one of C. S Peirce. Thank you.

I watch your videos every single day, I find them absolutely enlightening and makes philosophy fun to listen and learn, thank you The Living Philosophy, keep the good work!

@TheLivingPhilosophy

Жыл бұрын

Thank you so much PhiloReflex! That's a delight to hear!

Wonderful exposition of Saussure. Now I can see there would have been no Lacan without him.

@husso5

5 ай бұрын

he should do an episode on Lacan as well!!

I have been enjoying your videos for a while now. Nice work. 👍

@TheLivingPhilosophy

2 жыл бұрын

Thanks Kader!

This is the only channel I go where I consistently walk away with something to ponder and use in my life. So I am especially impressed when you share insights and explanations of ideas that make me consider another perspective. During the video, I was reminded about the psychological concept of "Subjective reality (my own personal visualization of what something means)" and "Objective reality (What it physically or scientifically is)." I enjoyed hearing a more nuanced and detailed definition of those concepts concerning the signs and symbols in our communication patterns. Your explanation about why we need "the signified" dragons really helped to explain those added nuances. Now I'm wondering why I thought the definition of subjective and objective concepts were so black and white. I did get one thing right, though. I have always clearly seen how the language a person uses, and even the rhythm of their speech helps to define their personality traits. Your Mozart reference was perfect because it captured this concept so elegantly. We all use the same symbols in our shared language, but some of us highlight different parts of the symbols. For example, one person might make a word vibrate longer, while another may chop the word up or brush over it. However, whatever we do, the word or symbol will still retain a primary essence in the language we use. We'll just bring our personality to it, and in doing so, we'll show the world how we think. Brilliant stuff, my friend. You make the wheels turn once again. Good job.

@TheLivingPhilosophy

2 жыл бұрын

Hello! Delighted to hear from you! I am very much in the same boat I think it's the cultural thing of having this clean black and white subjective vs objective and it feels like entering a labyrinth to think about how the story might be more nuanced. Certainly takes some wrapping the brain around! Always glad to facilitate the turning of wheels! I'm also struck by your sensory acuity. It was one thing that I wasn't strong with in NLP and it's such an important part of good coaching - sounds like you have it in heaps if you're picking up on those subtle nuances in people's speech

@mindsetsquareltd

2 жыл бұрын

@@TheLivingPhilosophy thanks for the compliment on my "Irish female magic" or as the scientist say, "superior sensory acuity". It is a cool super power and it's a fabulous tool to help someone look at all the perspectives. I can't wrap my head around you not being good at it though. That doesn't seem to fit with your ability to hunt for golden nuggets across time and history and return to present great insights. To reflect back to NLP, you're probably just chunking up. While the rest of us are looking for hints about mindset in an arched eyebrow, you're finding the core values of the great thinkers. So no, I'm not buying you aren't all that good with that. You're maybe just using it to hyper focus when you see brilliance or a deep insight. Now that's a massive superpower! This video is incredible. I am mad for words and language in general so it's insane to learn that how we use language can shift my feeling about something I thought I had nailed down. It was done and dusted. Then boom! The Living Philosophy shows up with a "did you hear about this one?" And I need to take it off the shelf and look some more.

@TheLivingPhilosophy

2 жыл бұрын

@@mindsetsquareltd Haha! You're very welcome. I think you're onto something with the chunking up. I like your reframe of it as a massive superpower! The way I think of it I'm very good in the realm of values and thoughts but my development in that domain has left an underdevelopment in my sensory acuity - like I've tuned different antennae or something. Love your appreciation for the video and glad to be throwing some extra ingredients into the wonderful soup!

You are a life savior ! Your videos always help , Thank you very much!!!! ❤

Thank you so much for your succinct and generous explanations.

Amazing video! You have a great way of explaining complex things and make them easily understandable 🌻

This was a brilliant, clear, concise explanation of a complicated topic. Thank you! The cognitive psych subfield of language development draws HEAVILY on these ideas - there's some really fascinating research about statistical word learning and how important relationships and context are in learning words.

@TheLivingPhilosophy

2 жыл бұрын

Delighted to hear it Kevin! Definitely a necessary foundational topic that's very important for a lot of later schools of thought

Thank you for this video, it was fun to learn about in college but this video really helped remind me of Saussure's ideas.

@TheLivingPhilosophy

2 жыл бұрын

Thanks Amygdala glad to offer a refresher course!!

This is, by far, the best teaching youtube channel. Thank you!

@TheLivingPhilosophy

2 жыл бұрын

Ah thank very much Mateus! That means a lot

What an amazing video, explained very well the beginning of the field, specially the last conclusion that language operates between relations and differences, not by the injection of innate meanings. I can see why this would have massive implications.

Thanks for the concise explanation! It was very helpful.

Great video, very clear and you come across very knowledgeable.

Very clear and interesting!

Super enjoyable! While Im familiar with this area its made vibrant with the art you’ve chosen to illustrate some of the key ideas. And also with your delivery or the material.

@TheLivingPhilosophy

2 жыл бұрын

Thanks Ryan!

thx, I enjoyed this ... I learned all of it decades ago when I studied English but had forgotten the whole thing :) very clear and precise and well presented

@TheLivingPhilosophy

2 жыл бұрын

Thanks a million veloopity!

Excellent explanation and introduction.

@TheLivingPhilosophy

2 жыл бұрын

Thanks toh!

This is awesome to hear and explore these ideas

@TheLivingPhilosophy

2 жыл бұрын

Thanks Natalie! Glad you enjoyed it!

Really enjoyed this intro to Saussure's ideas! Any chance you'd be willing to tackle some of Peirce's later developments? Also would very much love to see some videos on Biosemiotics -- the application of these ideas to biological systems. Marcello Barbieri has some interesting pieces on that. Hope to see more in the future!

@TheLivingPhilosophy

2 жыл бұрын

Yeah I wasn't sure whether to include Peirce in this but I think I will give him his own video. Also I was having thoughts on this biosemiotics and sounds like a field I'd be fascinated to explore so I appreciate the recommendation of Berbieri

Hello, I have enjoyed this video very much, thanks! I am not an expert on the subject, but when you explained the idea that "language works by relations" it came to mind an approach used in machine translation: basically, the "meaning" of a word gets defined as the bag of words that normally accompany this word in the literature. So, e.g. the meaning of cat is in its connection to, say, dog, milk, mouse, ... In your opinion, is this related to what Saussure meant, or do you think that I am off-road and this is my professional bias (I am a machine learning engineer ;) ? Cheers

Saussure had an interesting way of viewing an alphabet. It would be interesting to explore Saussure’s position with relation to Hebrew whose language and alphabet’s letters have deeper meanings in the form of the Etz Chaim, hermeneutics and scripture corresponding to the letters to the Smallest Yod? How about other languages behaving this way through a Saussurian lens?

So helpful, thank you!

Your channel is amazing. Keep going and good vibes

@TheLivingPhilosophy

2 жыл бұрын

Ah thank you so much Gabriel that means a lot!

Thanks for reference m doing ph d in future

Thank you.

I did injoy it verry mutch.

Episodes are instructive, could even be longer with slower pacing and more examples. Very much enjoy the thoughtful use of imagery. Which leads to the suggestion of episodes on aesthetics with attention to how pictures “mean” anything. Good work.

@TheLivingPhilosophy

2 жыл бұрын

The feedback is hugely appreciated Ted thank you very much!

Excellent piece! I always find myself looking at the words used. Especially in these days of rising fascism, propaganda, and populism. This seems to be a root of the works of Prof. Chomsky he used for his understanding of 'the power' of words, and their function. "Giants always stand of the shoulders of giants."

@AdolfStalin

2 жыл бұрын

There is no rising fascism. You are a neoliberal if you think so.

@thethree60five

2 жыл бұрын

@@AdolfStalin Oh for the love of stupid... What Cat got your google? I guess you comment was, as most of American thoughts, basically equating to a drive by dung fling.

I see langue as formal grammar and parole as the (collection of ) collections of all possible words you can make using that grammar.

His theory of differences & relations reminds me of what are called cataphatic and apophatic theologies in the Christian tradition, the former being positive statements which can be made because what is stated is within the realm of our understanding, the latter being negative statements for the opposite reason (using words like “immortal”, not mortal; “immutable” not able to change; “immaterial”, etc.). It seems to me like language of relation leans cataphatic while language of difference leans apophatic.

Chomsky theorizes or perhaps expands on the same duality of longue/parole in his idea of competence/performance, which indeed redefines the same duality between concreteness and abstractness regarding language . I just thought people would find this guy useful if they ever wanted to study more on the subject. If so, just look up the keyword "generative grammar."

@thethree60five

2 жыл бұрын

Another one that is not given enough credit for understanding language as propaganda is Edward Bernays, the nephew of Sigmund Freud. He basically started the idea of 'University spreaking tours' as a way to make his Uncles work more well known, and the fame and recognition that came with it. Some say his work may not have been quite as influential, had his nephew not 'made him famous'. Mr. Bernay's was instrumental in the creation of the Advertising in America, and quite the depth in understanding how, when, and why people react to an advertisement. If I am not mistaken, he was the first to state that if a consumer is exposed to a product 5 times through various mediums, it creates a natural recognition and 'feeling of knowing' in the consumer and they become likely to buy the product when exposed to it while shopping.

Thanks!

@TheLivingPhilosophy

6 ай бұрын

Thanks Karie!

Awesome

@mithridatesi9981

Жыл бұрын

Thanks for the heart. It really helped me a lot.

I would love to know your take on Binary Oppositions

@TheLivingPhilosophy

2 жыл бұрын

Funny you say that I've been using that a lot the past week as a tool. Could be a good thing to cover formally at some point! Thanks for the input Brian!

Languages like Chinese are less arbitrary since words have actually been formed as visual representations of the signifieds. E.g. The word person looks like a two legged creature 人 and mouth is an opening 口.

love the music! i think he's wrong about signifieds being arbitrary though. I don't think the meat and the animal are one signified in French, either. So it's more a matter of the same signifier being applied to two different signifieds, rather than differing signifieds.

You are like the Charlie of Philosophy

Thanks for the video, the examples are really helpful and vivid. But I have this question in my mind after watching which is how the signifiers and signifieds could be both arbitrary if language works on differentiation and relation. My entanglement is differentiating concludes consideration and I think that’s not arbitrary. And naming seems totally arbitrary to me… god I’m so confused 🥲

@TheLivingPhilosophy

2 жыл бұрын

Hmm hopefully we can figure it out Pohl. I just need you to explain what you mean by "language work on differentiation and relation. My entanglement is differentiating concludes consideration and I think that's not arbitrary". Any could chance you could paraphrase or elaborate on these lines? I'll try and answer anyway but I guess it may not work because I'm not going to be hitting your point directly. Naming i.e. the signifier is arbitrary you seem to have no problem there so that's all good. Let's talk about the signified then. This is the mental concept. It's not the name and it's not the referent (the thing out there in the "real world"). I can say dog I can say chien I can say hund. These are the English French and German signfiers that invoke the same signified. But what if you were an alien who had just arrived on the planet and you had no concept of what a dog is. You might see dogs foxes and wolves and let's say the aliens (for some strange reason) use the word dog for all of these animals. In this case they are using the same signifier but because they are coming from a different culture and are new to this planet the boundaries of their signified is different to the boundaries shared by the European neighbours. You could think of it in terms of a class if that makes is easier. So we could say that the class "dog" is larger for the aliens because it includes foxes and wolves while the class dog/chien/hund is the same for the Europeans. It captures the same conceptual ground i.e. it has the same signified. In the case of the alien the signifier is shared but the signified is different whereas in the case of the europeans the signified is shared while the signifiers are different. Dunno if that helps at all. Maybe I'm missing something with the differentiation thing. Let me know!

great video (comment for the algorithm)

Who would of thought Parole had meaning beyond my Parole officer.

Bro you explain the concepts beautifully, and your voice is awsome

@TheLivingPhilosophy

Жыл бұрын

thank you so much Ali! It's funny I had a couple of bad comments about the voice last week that hit me a bit - I think because I feel like I could improve my delivery and now today and yesterday your comment and another speaking highly of my voice so I'm very grateful to you!

this is the signified

this is the signifier

09:35 'exception proving the rule'??? Mistranslation of French 'exception qui preuve la regle'.

I find Saussure's notion of what's "arbitrary" a bit lacking. Surely assigning whatever set of sounds to a verbal sign is different from assigning different conceptual places to the same word. I mean, how we name things can surely be completely arbitrary: if we all agree that "croot" from now on will denote trees, that's enough. Entirely arbitrary, yet still effective. But if one language decides that "beef" if just the dead animal, and another decides that "boeuf" (almost the same word, slightly different pronunciation) is the animal either dead or alive, we can clearly identify and discuss the conceptual reason for dividing the conceptual space differently. In this case, it would be a historical account, namely that the nobility in England used French more frequently, and their language remained stuck to high-class foods. We can still understand the concept though, and there is nothing fully arbitrary or requiring mere agreement. If they had decided that the concept of "beef-boeuf" covered plants with red flowers as well, it would just have created confusion because we cannot see a reason for doing so. So Saussure is doing a little bit of sophistry here, using "arbitrary" in two different senses (completely indifferent choice vs. decision that can change due to circumstances but that can still be conceptually articulated and communicated) but then conflates them as a single concept. Now that's irony!.

@andreab380

2 жыл бұрын

Excellent video though! You're doing a really great job and deserve way more views!

Eine Kleine Nachtmusik* but other than that, great video :D

@TheLivingPhilosophy

3 ай бұрын

Haha thanks for the correction my German not so good 🙈

Didn't Wittgenstein destroy that theory?

Semiotics wasn't a subset of linguistics. It was a subset of logic and developed by C. S. Peirce. Semiology was a later subset of linguistics and developed by Ferdinand Saussure. ... Just to be pedantic!

The word is not the thing. Where does this leave us?

does anyone else recognize the complete LUNACY of this? I love this, but in 100, 50, 25, fuck.. even 3 yrs will this still matter?

I don't think it follows that if there is not a one-to-one correspondence between signified and referent that it is arbitrary. And I'm not criticizing you, I know that this is an exposition. I'm just --if the exposition is accurate on this particular point--disagreeing with Saussure.

@TheLivingPhilosophy

2 жыл бұрын

That's actually a very good point. While names/signifiers can be completely arbitrary the same can't earnestly be said of signifieds since whether a person sees 3, 7 or 70 colours in the rainbow they are still looking at a rainbow and seeing colour. You can chunk the perception differently but the same stimulus is still hitting the eyes of the beholders.

Referrent. You failed to mention referrent in your summary. Explicated referrent was the best part of your video; then you failed to mention it in your summary.

Langue in French = Language in English

i love him