Scribd
Upload
15 views4 pages

Understanding Structuralism in Humanities

Structuralism is a movement in the humanities that emerged in the 1950s and '60s, emphasizing language as a system of signs understood through their relationships. It challenged traditional literary interpretations by analyzing texts based on underlying structures and cultural codes, leading to insights about meaning and the constructed nature of reality. Key figures include Ferdinand de Saussure, Claude Levi-Strauss, and Roland Barthes, with structuralism eventually giving way to poststructuralism.

Uploaded by

Showket Ibraheem
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
15 views4 pages

Understanding Structuralism in Humanities

Structuralism is a movement in the humanities that emerged in the 1950s and '60s, emphasizing language as a system of signs understood through their relationships. It challenged traditional literary interpretations by analyzing texts based on underlying structures and cultural codes, leading to insights about meaning and the constructed nature of reality. Key figures include Ferdinand de Saussure, Claude Levi-Strauss, and Roland Barthes, with structuralism eventually giving way to poststructuralism.

Uploaded by

Showket Ibraheem
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

Structuralism

Structuralism is a movement of thought in the humanities, widespread in


anthropology, linguistics, and literary theory, and influential in the 1950s and ’60s.
Based primarily on the linguistic theories of Ferdinand de Saussure, structuralism
considered language as a system of signs and signification, the elements of which
are understandable only in relation to each other and to the system.

In literary theory, structuralism challenged the belief that a work of literature


reflected a given reality; instead, a text was constituted of linguistic conventions
and situated among other texts. Structuralist critics analyzed material by examining
underlying structures, such as characterization or plot, and attempted to show how
these patterns were universal and could thus be used to develop general
conclusions about both individual works and the systems from which they
emerged. The anthropologist Claude Levi-Strauss was an important champion of
structuralism, as was Roman Jakobsen. Northrop Frye’s attempts to categorize
Western literature by archetype had some basis in structuralist thought.
Structuralism regarded language as a closed, stable system, and by the late 1960s it
had given way to poststructuralism.

General Principles

1. Meaning occurs through difference. Meaning is not identification of the sign


with object in the real world or with some pre-existent concept or essential reality;
rather it is generated by difference among signs in a signifying system. For
instance, the meaning of the words "woman" and "lady" are established by their
relations to one another in a meaning-field. They both refer to a human female, but
what constitutes "human" and what constitutes "female" are themselves established
through difference, not identity with any essence, or ideal truth, or the like.

1
2. Relations among signs are of two sorts, contiguity and substitutability,
the axes of combination and selection: hence of the existence of all 'grammars',
hence all substitutions, hence the ability to know something by something else, or
by a part of it in some way -- hence metonymy and metaphor. The conception of
combination and selection provides the basis for an analysis of 'literariness' or
'poeticality' in the use, repetition and variation of sound patterns and combinations.
It also provides keys to the most fundamental elements of culture.

3. Structuralism notes that much of our imaginative world is structured of,


and structured by, binary oppositions (being/nothingness, hot/cold, culture/nature);
these oppositions structure meaning, and one can describe fields of cultural
thought, or topoi, by describing the binary sets which compose them. As an
illustration, here is a binary set for the monstrous

4. Structuralism forms the basis for semiotics, the study of signs: a sign is a
union of signifier and signified, and is anything that stands for anything else (or, as
Umberto Eco put it, a sign is anything that can be used to lie).

5. Central too to semiotics is the idea of codes, which give signs context --
cultural codes, literary codes, etc. The study of semiotics and of codes opens up
literary study to cultural study, and expands the resources of the critic in discussing
the meaning of texts. Structuralism, says, Genette, "is a study of the cultural
construction or identification of meaning according to the relations of signs that
constitute the meaning-spectrum of the culture."

6. Some signs carry with them larger cultural meanings, usually very
general; these are called, by Roland Barthes, "myths", or second-order signifiers.
Anything can be a myth. For example, two-story pillars supporting the portico of a
house are a mythic signifier of wealth and elegance.

2
7. Structuralism introduces the idea of the 'subject', as opposed to the idea of
the individual as a stable indivisible ego. Toquote from Kaja Silverman in The
Subject of Semiotics,

The term 'subject' foregrounds the relationship between ethnology,


psychoanalysis, and semiotics. It helps us to conceive of human reality as a
construction, as the product of signifying activities which are both culturally
specific and generally unconscious. The category of the subject thus calls into
question the notions both of the private, and of a self synonymous with
consciousness. It suggests that even desire is culturally instigated, and hence
collective; and it de-centers consciousness, relegating it....to a purely receptive
capacity. Finally, by drawing attention to the divisions which separate one area of
psychic activity from another, the term 'subject' challenges the value of stability
attributed to the individual.

8. The conception of the constructed subject opens up the borders between


the conscious and the unconscious. The unconscious itself is not some strange,
impenetrable realm of private meaning but is constructed through the sign-systems
and through the repressions of the culture. Both the self and the unconscious are
cultural constructs.

9. In the view of structuralism our knowledge of 'reality' is not only coded


but also conventional, that is, structured by and through conventions, made up of
signs and signifying practices. This is known as "the social construction of reality."

10. There is, then, in structuralism, a coherent connection among the


conceptions of reality, the social, the individual, the unconscious: they are all
composed of the same signs, codes and conventions, all working according to
similar laws.

3
4

Common questions

Powered by AI

Metonymy and metaphor are vital in structuralism as they illustrate how meaning is derived from the combination and selection of signs. Metonymy allows understanding through association, while metaphor relies on similarity and substitution. These figures underpin the axes of combination and selection in language, forming the basis for an analysis of ''literariness'' or ''poeticality''. They highlight how cultural and literary codes use repetition, variation, and sound patterns to create meaning, revealing fundamental cultural elements .

Structuralism introduces the concept of the 'subject' as opposed to the stable, indivisible individual. This view emphasizes that human reality is a construct formed by culturally specific signifying activities. The 'subject' highlights the influence of culture and the unconscious, challenging the idea of a self rooted in stable consciousness. It frames consciousness as a receptive capacity shaped by cultural repressions and sign systems, leading to a destabilized notion of individuality, unlike the traditional view that equates consciousness with the self .

The concept of 'the social construction of reality' in structuralism asserts that knowledge of reality is not merely discovered but constructed through cultural conventions and signifying practices. Structuralism posits that our understanding of reality is coded and shaped by social symbols, making it conventional rather than objective. This perspective ties together the notions of reality, the social, the individual, and the unconscious as constructed through the same sign systems and laws, emphasizing the role of language and culture in shaping human perception .

Binary oppositions are fundamental to structuralism as they structure meaning by creating contrasting pairs that define cultural thought. These oppositions, like hot/cold or culture/nature, provide a framework for analyzing the relationships and distinctions in meaning. For instance, the concept of 'monstrous' can be understood by analyzing the binary oppositions that compose it, such as normal/abnormal .

Structuralism reconciles conscious and unconscious elements by viewing both as cultural constructs formed through sign systems. The 'subject' is seen as a product of these signifying activities, incorporating unconscious cultural repressions. By decentering consciousness, structuralism suggests that the unconscious is not an isolated realm but rather a dimension constructed through the same codes shaping reality. Both conscious understanding and unconscious desires are interwoven as components of the 'subject', emphasizing collective cultural influences over individual autonomy .

Structuralism challenges the traditional belief by asserting that a text is composed of linguistic conventions and exists among other texts, rather than reflecting an objective reality. This view holds that literature should be analyzed in terms of underlying structures, like characterization and plot, which reveal universal patterns. Meaning in literature, according to structuralism, is generated by differences within the language system, rather than by reflecting the real world .

The study of semiotics in structuralism expands literary criticism by incorporating the analysis of cultural codes. It emphasizes the understanding of texts not only as literary objects but as cultural artifacts influenced by sign-systems. This approach broadens critical resources and perspectives by situating texts within the spectrum of cultural meanings, examining how literary elements function within larger cultural contexts, and understanding their participation in cultural signification and identity formation .

According to Roland Barthes, signs within a structuralist framework carry larger cultural meanings and are termed 'myths' or second-order signifiers. Myths consist of signs that transcend their immediate context, acquiring broader cultural or ideological significance. For example, house pillars can signify wealth and elegance. The interpretation of myths thus involves understanding the secondary meanings that signs evoke in their cultural context .

Structuralism posits that meaning arises from distinctions within a system of signs rather than direct association with objects or concepts. This view implies that understanding is relational—words gain significance through their differentiation from other words within a language. For example, the meaning of 'woman' and 'lady' depends on their relational context rather than intrinsic properties. Such distinctions form a 'meaning-field', illustrating that language and meaning are dynamic, not fixed entities. This challenges the notion of essential truths, emphasizing instead the fluidity and interdependence of language systems .

Structuralist theory views language as a closed, stable system, which influences various fields by encouraging the analysis of systems of signs under cohesive structures. In anthropology, it focuses on the relational structures underlying cultural practices. Literary theory uses structuralist principles to examine patterns in texts, while in semiotics, it provides tools for exploring the relations of signs in cultural codes. This cross-disciplinary approach allows for a deeper understanding of cultural constructs and their meanings .

You might also like