Towards the end of the XIX century - apparently everything looks good for the time, and some still remain convincing for the present - the language similarities with biology has been widely rejected . This raises the difficulty of understanding the language as an academic discipline : If the language is not the species alive , in the sense of whether the language is " stuff " that can be investigated ? A layman pleased that the French language is something that can be learned , which have certain devices and in some cases the same or similar to English but in other respects different ; but when the French language in an item and that item is something strange . It is clear that the language was not a concrete object such as a table or as a stretch of land called France . You can not see or hear the French language . You can hear is Gaston the waiter said " pas si bete ..... " : You can see a line of printed letters on a sheet of newspaper " Le Monde " ; but how we can interpret a being called the French language which is behind the thousands of concrete phenomena that can be observed as in the two earlier examples ? What kind of form that language ? Biological paradigm shows the relationship between the speech and language of France such as the relationship between Carrot ( carrot ) and certain species of carrots : Funds up to the rejection of the biological paradigm opinion , such opinion has been deemed satisfactory - although one can only see or eat carrots , important enough votes to discuss species carrots and discuss , say , genetic relationship with species potatoes . But the first time biologists have been thrown to the side of the road ; second , people have found that paradigm can not provide a complete answer to the ongoing discussion . In biology , because the species is an abstraction , not least the individual species are goods that are concrete , some kinds of goods easier deemed more appropriate than carrots . But the linguistic analogy to biological individual is idiolek ; and almost all , if not all , the same as a broad abstraction of the concept of language . We can not hear idiolek Gaston as a form ; we can only hear the idiolek examples - comments which he says that he saw a tip that we left off , and it does not have idiolek example parallels in biology . So although it is not regarded as a particular problem by linguists of the nineteenth century , the question " How does understanding a form called a language or a dialect of the underlying reality that can be felt rather than specific utterances ? Remain open at that time . People who answer that can satisfy experts as well as experts during her today is the Swiss scholar : Ferdinand de Saussure .
MONGIN Ferdinand de Saussure , his full name , was born in Jenawa in 1857 , the son of the Huguenot families who moved from Lorraine during the French religious wars in the late sixteenth century . Although people now regard as the first Saussure provides a definition of the notion that so-called synchronic linguistics - the study of language as a system contained in a certain time , which is distinguished by historical linguistics ( which to distinguish Saussure called diachronic linguistics ) is for experts contemporaries is the only approach available for studying that time was - in his lifetime was not meant to make it famous . Saussure got sebafai education expert of ancient languages , and succeeded when still a young man published a book entitled Memoire sur lesysteme primitive dans les langues des Voyelles indo - europeennes ( 1878) . The book was published a few weeks after his birthday XXI : When he was a student in Germany . The book is one of the basic reconstruction of Proto- Indo- European language . Saussure gives Ecole Pratique des Hautes lecture Etudes in Paris from 1881 to 1891, before he returned to teaching in Geneva , all publishing , and almost all the lectures he gave , throughout his more than dealing with historical linguistics synchronic linguistics , with in-depth analysis about the various Indo- European languages and not with the general theory that makes it famous now .
In fact , although Saussure produce his work on the theory of general linguistics at about 1890 ( Koerner , 1973: 29 ) , he seems reluctant to give it to someone else , and the story of how his ideas can go into publishing is a strange story . In late 1906 he was asked to take over responsibility in giving lectures on general linguistics and comparative history and languages of the Indo - European from a scholar who has quit his service for 30 years ; Saussure taught the material on the rest of her student days and on the lectures in 1908-1909 and in 1910-1911 . In the first years of Saussure limit at only about historical matters ; but when he gave the two years he was also a brief introduction to post a synchronic linguistics , and the third lecture , the entire semester is used to provide synchronous linguistic theory . Shortly afterward he died , without a chance to publish any material that theory . Some people have been asked to publish , but he always answered that for preparing lecture materials very time-consuming , but the two people reakannya , Charles Albert Bally nd Sechehaye decided on a new fabric of the student lecture notes along with notes Saussure left college . The book they produced is called Cours de linguistique gererale ( Saussure 1916) Brazilians is a medium that can be used by scholars in the world to understand the thinking of Saussure , Saussure and because this is a document known as the father of twentieth -century linguist .
Before discussing the so-called " ontological statement " - before we talk about that kind of thing does bahaa according to Saussure thought , if the language is not a living organism as the opinion of the experts Schleicher or another - let us see first the difference between diachronic and synchronic and the reasons Saussure's why it is very important differences .
Types of linguistic publishing widely known by students Saussure is an idea that analyzes a form or a range of shapes contained in a language with which the trace levels through the level languages such as reaching a state of the current ; and Saussure stated that any profits from the analysis of pliers there , the results can not provide any explanation of how the language works something from the point of the content of the language user - because the speakers , there is no history of the language ( page 81 ) . Imagine , for example , the debate in terms of whether the description of English spelling ch sound affricate with a unitary or combined sound / t / sound followed by / S / . There are so many arguments in favor of both : Completion of the two is more reliable , because it is said that the English have different sounds that are fewer in number , but otherwise it means that the sound is very different consonant clusters with clusters other English language ( eg no cluster / kS /, /pS/) . What is not relevant , when analyzed in phonological must declare the truth of the English language as a means of communication between speakers of contemporary English , the language is historically , ch comes from a culture by language experts in its efforts to reduce the clutter that turns the face of adversity . Some scholars continue the investigation of the language support in the traditional way ; but apparently not , it is wrong to say that such scholars as archaeological experts who have funny things of a particular language for their own sake and not merely as a scientist . I have expressed the opinion that the rejection of Darwin's paradigm for linguistic lack of motivation than last time ; but at the turn of the century ( to the twentieth century ) it is clear that there are at least a scientific method that can be used to study linguistics , not a historical approach , but it was time for synchronous discovery .
