Semiology?

My eyes navigated through Ferdinand de Saussure’s words, but never completely understood the ideas shared. When trying to find meaning beneath the convoluted ideas, I found it helpful to apply the concepts to areas studied in the past. For instance, Ferdinand de Saussure insists, “language is a system of interdependent terms in which the value of each term results solely from the simultaneous presence of the others…” (7). Linking this idea with his argument that “their most precise characteristic is in being what the others are not” I was able to make more tangible comparisons (for me at least) (9). It is hard to think in instances of values, inflections, and signification. Immediately after reading his thought of concepts being defined by being what others are not, my mind flashed to Sut Jhally’s Dreamworlds 3. In the film, Jhally examined how femininity was constructed in music videos. As the documentary seemed to be a critique of constructions of femininity, it also examined how this construction defined masculinity. By exploring femininity and masculinity, one concept gained value by its opposition to the other. Men as aggressors marked women as passive participants. So, Saussure’s argument in the value of terms is dependent on the presence of others plays out in Jhally’s analysis of masculinity being defined in opposition to femininity. One concept can not exist without the other. Although, I’m not sure if Saussure’s theory is meant to be spread so far, I feel like understanding femininity and masculinity as defined through opposition, helps me get back to the basic elements.
Saussure’s thought that, “if words stood for pre-existing concepts, they would all have exact equivalents in meaning from one language to the next” was a helpful point (8). As I study French, I am more aware of this argument. I always wanted to directly translate sayings. In class someone wanted to say “shut your mouth” and questioned if it would be “fermez la bouche” in French. The professor insisted this saying would not exist in France. Instantly it was hard to understand why not? I mean, the words are the same (fermez = shut… la bouche = mouth) but the meanings and instances of use attributed to these words in the French language differed. This example serves Saussure’s argument. These words are used in slightly different ways in French. Although they have the same basic meaning, they have different concepts, which limits word for word translation. Each language assigns concepts to their words.