Structuralism and Semiotics (1920s-present)

Note: Structuralism, semiotics, and post-structuralism are some of the most complex literary theories to understand. Please be patient.

LINGUISTIC ROOTS

The structuralist school emerges from theories of language and linguistics, and it looks for underlying elements in culture and literature that can be connected so that critics can develop general conclusions about the individual works and the systems from which they emerge. In fact, structuralism maintains that “…practically everything we do that is specifically human is expressed in language” (Richter 809). Structuralists believe that these language symbols extend far beyond written or oral communication.

For example, codes that represent all sorts of things permeate everything we do: “the performance of music requires complex notation…our economic life rests upon the exchange of labor and goods for symbols, such as cash, checks, stock, and certificates…social life depends on the meaningful gestures and signals of ‘body language’ and revolves around the exchange of small, symbolic favors: drinks, parties, dinners” (Richter 809).

PATTERNS AND EXPERIENCE

Structuralists assert that, since language exists in patterns, certain underlying elements are common to all human experiences. Structuralists believe we can observe these experiences through patterns: “…if you examine the physical structures of all buildings built in urban America in 1850 to discover the underlying principles that govern their composition, for example, principles of mechanical construction or of artistic form…” you are using a structuralist lens (Tyson 197).

Moreover, “you are also engaged in structuralist activity if you examine the structure of a single building to discover how its composition demonstrates underlying principles of a structural system. In the first example…you’re generating a structural system of classification; in the second, you’re demonstrating that an individual item belongs to a particular structural class” (Tyson 197).

STRUCTURALISM IN LITERARY THEORY

Structuralism is used in literary theory, for example, “…if you examine the structure of a large number of short stories to discover the underlying principles that govern their composition…principles of narrative progression…or of characterization…you are also engaged in structuralist activity if you describe the structure of a single literary work to discover how its composition demonstrates the underlying principles of a given structural system” (Tyson 197-198).

Northrop Frye, however, takes a different approach to structuralism by exploring ways in which genres of Western literature fall into his four mythoi (also see Jungian criticism in the Freudian Literary Criticism resource):

theory of modes, or historical criticism (tragic, comic, and thematic);
theory of symbols, or ethical criticism (literal/descriptive, formal, mythical, and anagogic);
theory of myths, or archetypal criticism (comedy, romance, tragedy, irony/satire);
theory of genres, or rhetorical criticism (epos, prose, drama, lyric) (Tyson 240).

PEIRCE AND SAUSSURE

Two important theorists form the framework (hah) of structuralism: Charles Sanders Peirce and Ferdinand de Saussure. Peirce gave structuralism three important ideas for analyzing the sign systems that permeate and define our experiences:

“iconic signs, in which the signifier resembles the thing signified (such as the stick figures on washroom doors that signify ‘Men’ or ‘Women’;
indexes, in which the signifier is a reliable indicator of the presence of the signified (like fire and smoke);
true symbols, in which the signifier’s relation to the thing signified is completely arbitrary and conventional [just as the sound /kat/ or the written word cat are conventional signs for the familiar feline]” (Richter 810).

These elements become very important when we move into deconstruction in the Postmodernism resource. Peirce also influenced the semiotic school of structuralist theory that uses sign systems.

Sign Systems

The discipline of semiotics plays an important role in structuralist literary theory and cultural studies. Semioticians “…appl[y] structuralist insights to the study of…sign systems…a non-linguistic object or behavior…that can be analyzed as if it were a language” (Tyson 205). Specifically, “…semiotics examines the ways non-linguistic objects and behaviors ‘tell’ us something.

For example, the picture of the reclining blond beauty in the skin-tight, black velvet dress on the billboard…’tells’ us that those who drink this whiskey (presumably male) will be attractive to…beautiful women like the one displayed here” (Tyson 205). Lastly, Richter states, “semiotics takes off from Peirce – for whom language is one of numerous sign systems – and structuralism takes off from Saussure, for whom language was the sign system par excellence” (810).

Typical questions:

Using a specific structuralist framework (like Frye’s mythoi)…how should the text be classified in terms of its genre? In other words, what patterns exist within the text that make it a part of other works like it?
Using a specific structuralist framework…analyze the text’s narrative operations…can you speculate about the relationship between the…[text]… and the culture from which the text emerged? In other words, what patterns exist within the text that make it a product of a larger culture?
What patterns exist within the text that connect it to the larger “human” experience? In other words, can we connect patterns and elements within the text to other texts from other cultures to map similarities that tell us more about the common human experience? This is a liberal humanist move that assumes that since we are all human, we all share basic human commonalities.
What rules or codes of interpretation must be internalized in order to ‘make sense’ of the text?
What are the semiotics of a given category of cultural phenomena, or ‘text,’ such as high-school football games, television and/or magazine ads for a particular brand of perfume…or even media coverage of an historical event? (Tyson 225)

Here is a list of scholars we encourage you to explore to further your understanding of this theory:

Charles Sanders Peirce
Ferdinand de Saussure – Course in General Linguistics, 1923
Claude Lévi-Strauss – The Elementary Structure of Kinship, 1949; “The Structural Study of Myth,” 1955
Northrop Frye – Anatomy of Criticism: Four Essays, 1957
Noam Chomsky – Syntactic Structures, 1957; Aspects of the Theory of Syntax, 1965
Roland Barthes – Critical Essays, 1964; Mythologies, 1957; S/Z, 1970; Image, Music, Text, 1977
Umberto Eco – The Role of the Reader, 1979