语言是一种符号系统吗?列宁,索绪尔和象形文字理论

IF 1 1区 文学 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Sign Systems Studies Pub Date : 2022-06-01 DOI:10.12697/sss.2022.50.1.08
Patrick Sériot
{"title":"语言是一种符号系统吗?列宁,索绪尔和象形文字理论","authors":"Patrick Sériot","doi":"10.12697/sss.2022.50.1.08","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper strives to pursue two goals at the same time: how can one get to know in depth the intellectual life of the USSR in the 1930s–1950s; and, what can the virulent anti-Saussurean criticism in Russia at that time tell us about the specificity of the Marxist-Leninist theory of signs? \nWe propose the following angle of attack: the recurring theme of this criticism, namely that Saussure’s Cours presents a “theory of hieroglyphics”, therefore a type of “bourgeois idealist” theory that Lenin assailed in his 1909 book Materialism and Empiriocriticism about Ernst Mach. Yet thinking about hieroglyphics is based on much older controversies, dating back to the 17th century and concerning the deciphering of Egyptian writing. The issue which arises here is semiotic in nature: it is the scalar opposition between transparency and opacity of the sign that is at stake. Does the sign hide or reveal? The Soviet discourse on language and signs in the 1930s–1950s seems to be based on an interrogation of the sign/referent, language/ thought, form/content relationship. A part of the history of semiotics can thus be discovered from the critique of the “hieroglyphic theory”, a little-known episode in a debate on the interpretation of Saussurism.","PeriodicalId":44467,"journal":{"name":"Sign Systems Studies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Is language a system of signs? Lenin, Saussure and the theory of hieroglyphics\",\"authors\":\"Patrick Sériot\",\"doi\":\"10.12697/sss.2022.50.1.08\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper strives to pursue two goals at the same time: how can one get to know in depth the intellectual life of the USSR in the 1930s–1950s; and, what can the virulent anti-Saussurean criticism in Russia at that time tell us about the specificity of the Marxist-Leninist theory of signs? \\nWe propose the following angle of attack: the recurring theme of this criticism, namely that Saussure’s Cours presents a “theory of hieroglyphics”, therefore a type of “bourgeois idealist” theory that Lenin assailed in his 1909 book Materialism and Empiriocriticism about Ernst Mach. Yet thinking about hieroglyphics is based on much older controversies, dating back to the 17th century and concerning the deciphering of Egyptian writing. The issue which arises here is semiotic in nature: it is the scalar opposition between transparency and opacity of the sign that is at stake. Does the sign hide or reveal? The Soviet discourse on language and signs in the 1930s–1950s seems to be based on an interrogation of the sign/referent, language/ thought, form/content relationship. A part of the history of semiotics can thus be discovered from the critique of the “hieroglyphic theory”, a little-known episode in a debate on the interpretation of Saussurism.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44467,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sign Systems Studies\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sign Systems Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.12697/sss.2022.50.1.08\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sign Systems Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12697/sss.2022.50.1.08","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

本文力求同时追求两个目标:如何深入了解20世纪30年代至50年代的苏联知识分子生活;而且,当时俄国对索绪尔的恶毒批评,能告诉我们马列主义符号理论的特殊性吗?我们提出以下的攻击角度:这一批评的反复出现的主题,即索绪尔的课程提出了一种“象形文字理论”,因此是列宁在他1909年的《唯物主义和对恩斯特·马赫的经验批判》一书中攻击的一种“资产阶级唯心主义”理论。然而,对象形文字的思考是基于更古老的争议,可以追溯到17世纪,涉及到对埃及文字的解读。这里出现的问题本质上是符号学的:这是危险的符号的透明和不透明之间的标量对立。这个标志是隐藏还是显露?在20世纪30 - 50年代,苏联关于语言和符号的话语似乎是基于对符号/指称物、语言/思想、形式/内容关系的质疑。因此,符号学历史的一部分可以从对“象形文字理论”的批判中发现,这是索绪尔主义解释辩论中一个鲜为人知的插曲。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Is language a system of signs? Lenin, Saussure and the theory of hieroglyphics
This paper strives to pursue two goals at the same time: how can one get to know in depth the intellectual life of the USSR in the 1930s–1950s; and, what can the virulent anti-Saussurean criticism in Russia at that time tell us about the specificity of the Marxist-Leninist theory of signs? We propose the following angle of attack: the recurring theme of this criticism, namely that Saussure’s Cours presents a “theory of hieroglyphics”, therefore a type of “bourgeois idealist” theory that Lenin assailed in his 1909 book Materialism and Empiriocriticism about Ernst Mach. Yet thinking about hieroglyphics is based on much older controversies, dating back to the 17th century and concerning the deciphering of Egyptian writing. The issue which arises here is semiotic in nature: it is the scalar opposition between transparency and opacity of the sign that is at stake. Does the sign hide or reveal? The Soviet discourse on language and signs in the 1930s–1950s seems to be based on an interrogation of the sign/referent, language/ thought, form/content relationship. A part of the history of semiotics can thus be discovered from the critique of the “hieroglyphic theory”, a little-known episode in a debate on the interpretation of Saussurism.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Sign Systems Studies
Sign Systems Studies HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊最新文献
Meaning-generating mechanisms and the semiosphere: Towards the semiotics of modern apocrypha Bulgarian culture and space in the religious context Considerations about the ‘right to a biography’: Saints and intellectuals in contemporary culture On binary opposition and binarism: A long-distance dialogue between decolonial critique and the Lotmanian semiotics Beneath Thy Protection: Portrait of the Holy Virgin as a semantic operator
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1