Class Notes (807,399)
United States (312,520)
English (113)
E 341 (23)


4 Pages
Unlock Document

Colorado State University
E 341
Aparna Gollapudi

Take Away Concepts 1 Structuralism: Saussure, Culler, Barthes Structuralist theories about how linguistic signs function can be used to analyze literature because: Literary texts are linguistic constructs. Literature participates in, shapes, and is molded by culture – and culture, as Culler and Barthes note, functions as does language. Literature is a signifying system of signs (and thus functions as do linguistic systems) insofar as its referent (or “meaning”) is at a distance from it. Barry says for eg. “A signifying system…is a very wide concept, it means any organized and structured set of signs which carried cultural meanings” (45). Linguistic signs are arbitrary, and the meanings we often accept as “natural” are in fact only a convention. A particular word or phrase might recur in a literary work – its meaning in the text can be considered by thinking of it as a sign with an arbitrary link with the referent or a signifier with a random link to the signified. How does approaching the text through the arbitrary nature of linguistic signs shift or change meanings of literary work? Is there any word or phrase that is significant or recurring in MB that could be usefully considered in the context of the arbitrary nature of the linguistic sign where signifiers are not intrinsically connected to the signifier but only depend about context or convention? One eg. is the word “marriage”: For instance, Pinkerton’s “marriage” is a cultural sign; its social signifier is the ceremony at the beginning of the opera. But what exactly is the signified? The tragedy at the center of the opera can be seen as a result of the fundamentally arbitrary nature of the link between signifier and signified, where meaning is maintained only through the force of community contract and convention. The signifier – the ceremony – is linked to a different signified for Pinkerton (a temporary bond of convenience) than the signified attributed to it by Butterfly (eternal union). Linguistic signs are relational: they “mean” only in relation to others. Thus: Any literary text creates meaning only in relation to the larger structures of genre and literary convention that govern it. A poem made of fourteen lines can only be ‘understood’ if we know what “sonnet” is; the heightened emotionality and replacement of dialogue with singing in opera only has meaning within conventions of genre. Also, in other cases, departures from convention of genre – such as Modernist, stream of consciousness novels such as Joyce’s – can be understood only in relation to the th conventions of the 19 century realist novel which he displaces. How does looking at MB in terms of the generic convention and pattern help us ‘understand’ what is means and, more significantly perhaps, how it means? Another kind of linguistic “relationality” – Meaning of linguistic signs depends on the establishment of dyads or binaries – we do not understand “dark” independent of “light”. Binaries or dyads are central to how literary works make meaning. We cannot understand “hero” without its binary “villain.” Often a character is pitted against another who is his or her “opposite” – only then can authorial meaning be conveyed. If the character is seen in isolation, and not as a part of the implicit binary, then he/she fails as a sign, fails to create meaning. Also, literary work have all sorts of other binaries – in settings (for eg. outside/open sea vs. inside/prison like house in Madame Butterfly), value systems (Eastern superstition vs Western rationalism) etc. which are fundamental to the meanings attributed to a literary text. Consider how your understanding of MB is dictated by the various kinds of binaries around which the opera is structured? Relationality of language also works via the paradigmatic process, the process in which each sign is “like-but-not quite the same” as another sign. Different elements in a work can be seen as occupying a paradigmatic chain – for eg. Suzuki only makes sen
More Less

Related notes for E 341

Log In


Don't have an account?

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.