Syntagmatic and Paradigmatic
Ferdinand de Saussure saw the
linguistic sign at once as static and dynamic or developing The pairing of
terms, synchrony-diachrony; form-substance; langue-parole as sets of
contrasting relations amply demonstrates this concept. The idea is to highlight
and demonstrate two dominant properties of a linguistic sign, one linear and
the other arbitrary. La langue is thus more stable and predictably organized
than la parole which displays freedom and dynamism which is not rule-governed,
therefore unpredictable. Similarly, de Saussure put forward the concepts of
syntagmatic and paradigmatic and what he at that time called ‘associative
relations’.
It is commonplace today to say that
linguistics is structural and languages as analyzed by linguist are treated
structurally. There are two kind of relationship the structure and langae –
sthe syntagmatic and the paradigmatic. Words become sentence because they are
chained together. This chain relationship is called syntagmatic relationship.
It is the combination or chain relationship. For instance.“We can come tomorrow.”
This is a sentence because in this
chain arrangement of words we is related with can, can is related with come,
and so on. For the relationship is that a
Pronoun + AV (Auxiliary Verb) + MV (Main
Verb) + Adverb.
The relationship of a sentence should
be in a particular manner or order. “Come
can tomorrow we” is not a sentence. So in the syntagm, every word has its value and position. Every
word is different from the words which precede it or follow it. In the above
sentence ‘we’ is not what ‘can’ is not, ‘can’ is not what ‘come’ is what
‘tomorrow’ is not ‘come’. In this manner, syntagmatic relations are those hold
between elements forming serious structure at a
given time. The concept of syntagmatic relations underlines the
structural potential of any item, under examination.
Paradigmatic
The paradigmatic relationships are
contrastive or choice relationships. Words that have something in common, are;
associated in the memory, resulting in groups marked by diverse relations. For
example, the English word learning
will unconsciously call to mind a host of other words––study, knowledge, discipline,
etc. All these words are related in some way. This kind of relationship is
called associative or paradigmatic relationship. Here the co-ordinations are
outside discourse and are not supported by linearity. They are relations in
absentia, and are vertical type relations. Their seat is in the brain; they are
a part of the inner storehouse that makes up language of each speaker.”
(Saussure)
A syntagm immediately suggests an
order of succession and fixed number of elements terms in associative family
which occur neither in fixed numbers nor in a definite code. e.g. If we
associate painful, delightful, fruitful etc. we are unable to predict the
number of words that may be suggested by the memory or order in which they will
appear. A particular word is the centre
of a constellation around which spring other words. These relations are
unpredictable. Associations that are called up in one person may not occur in
the mind of another. Since it is psychological, it is also subject to
individual vagaries and governed by the specific factors governing the individual’s
speech behaviour, Paradigmatic relations are unpredictable, free, dynamic and
idiosyncratic, comparable to la parole. It is a choice relationship. It operate
in Phonemes. Words, and Morphemes. They syntagmatic relationship is horizontal
while the paradigmatic relationship is vertical. It could be illustrated in the
following manner.
- Weà canà meet àtomorrow syntagmatic
- Youà couldà goà now
- Ià will àeat ànext
- Sheà shouldà comeà soon. à paradigmatic
It was the Danish linguist Lois Hjelmslev who suggested the
term ‘paradigmatic’ for de Saussure’s’ ‘assocative relations’.²
²
²
No comments:
Post a Comment