Changes

l. According to Saussure, the [[sign is the basic unit of LANGUAGE ]] (ÕQRguÄ''signe'').The sign is constituted by two elements: a conceptual element (which Saussure calls the signified), and a phonological element (called the signifier). The two elements are linked by an arbitrary but unbreakable bond. Saussure represented the sign by means of a diagram (Figurel7; see Saussure, 1916: 114).In this diagram, the arrows represent the reciprocal implication inherent in signification, and the line between the signified and the signifier represents umon.

Lacan takes up the Saussurean concept of defines the sign in his as that which 'linguistic turnrepresents something for someone' , in psychoanalysis during the 1950s, but subjects it opposition to several modifications.Firstly, whereas Saussure posited the reciprocal implication between the [[signifier and the signified (they are as mutually interdependent as two sides of a sheet of paper)]], Lacan argues which is "that the relation between which represents a subject for another signifier and signified is extremely unstable (see suP). Secondly, Lacan asserts the existence of an order of 'pure signifiers'"<ref>S11, where signifiers exist prior to signifieds; this order of purely logical structure is the unconscious. This amounts to a destruction of Saussure's concept of the sign; for Lacan, a language is not composed of signs but of signifiers.207</ref>

To illustrate By engaging with the contrast between his own views and those of Saussure, Lacan replaces Saussure's diagram concept of the sign with an algorithm (Figurel8) which, Lacan argues, should be attributed to Saussure (and is thus now sometimes referred sets his work in close relation to as the 'Saussurean algorithm' - see Escience of semiotics, 149)which has grown rapidly in the twentieth century.

The S in Figure 18 stands for the signifier, and the s for the signified; the position of the signified and the signifier is thus inverted, showing the primacy Two main lines of development can be discerned within semiotics: the signifier European line associated with Ferdinand de Saussure (which is capitalised, whereas Saussure himself baptised with the signifier is reduced to mere lower-case italicname of 'semiology'). The arrows and the circle are abolished, representing the absence of a stable or fixed relation between signifier and signified. The BAR between the signifier and the signified no longer represents union but the resistance inherent in significationNorth American line associated with Charles S. For Lacan, this algorithm defines 'the topography of the unconscious' (E, 163)Peirce.

2l. According to PeirceSaussure, the sign is something the basic unit of [[language]].The sign is constituted by two elements: a conceptual element (which represents an object to some interpretant (Saussure calls the term 'object' can mean, for Peircesignified), and a physical thing, phonological element (called the signifier). The two elements are linked by an event, an idea, or another arbitrary but unbreakable bond. Saussure represented the sign)by means of a diagram. Peirce divides signs into three classes<ref>Figurel7; see Saussure, 1916: 'symbols'114</ref>In this diagram, the arrows represent the reciprocal implication inherent in signification, 'indices' and 'icons', which differ in the way they relate to line between the signified and the objectsignifier represents umon. The symbol has no 'natural' or necessary relationship to the object it

refers to, but is related to Lacan takes up the Saussurean concept of the object by a purely conventional rule. The INDEX has an sign in his 'existential relationlinguistic turn' to in psychoanalysis during the object 1950s, but subjects it represents (i.eto several modifications. Firstly, whereas Saussure posited the reciprocal implication between the index is always spatially or temporally contiguous to signifier and the objectsignified (they are as mutually interdependent as two sides of a sheet of paper), Lacan argues that the relation between signifier and signified is extremely unstable. The icon represents Secondly, Lacan asserts the existence of an object by exhibiting its form via similarity. Peirceorder of 'pure signifiers's distinctions between icons, indices and symbols are analytical and not intended where signifiers exist prior to be mutually exclusivesignifieds; this order of purely logical structure is the unconscious. Hence This amounts to a destruction of Saussure's concept of the sign will almost always function in a variety of modes; personal pronouns, for exampleLacan,are a language is not composed of signs which function both [[Symbolic]]ally and indexically (see Peirce, 1932: 156-73; Burks, 1949)but of signifiers.

Lacan takes up Peirce's concept of To illustrate the index in order to distinguish contrast between the psychoanalytic his own views and medical concepts those of the symptomSaussure, and to distinguish between (animal) codes and (human) languages. Lacan also develops the concept replaces Saussure's diagram of the index along the lines set down by Roman Jakobson in the concept of the SHIFTERsign with an algorithm which, Lacan argues, should be attributed to distinguish between the subject of the statement Saussure (and is thus now sometimes referred to as the subject of the enunciation'Saussurean algorithm').<ref> - see E, 149</ref>

2. According to Peirce, the sign is something which represents an object to some interpretant (the term 'object' can mean, for Peirce, a physical thing, an event, an idea, or another sign). Peirce divides signs into three classes: 'symbols', 'indices' and 'icons', which differ in the way they relate to the object. The symbol has no 'natural' or necessary relationship to the object it refers to, but is related to the object by a purely conventional rule. The [[index]] has an 'existential relation' to the object it represents (i.e. the index is always spatially or temporally contiguous to the object). The icon represents an object by exhibiting its form via similarity. Peirce's distinctions between icons, 35indices and symbols are analytical and not intended to be mutually exclusive. Hence a sign will almost always function in a variety of modes; personal pronouns, 54for example, 157are signs which function both [[Symbolic]]ally and indexically.<ref>see Peirce, 2071932: 156-73; Burks, 2371949</ref> Lacan takes up Peirce's concept of the index in order to distinguish between the psychoanalytic and medical concepts of the symptom, 245 and to distinguish between (animal) codes and (human) languages. Lacan also develops the concept of the index along the lines set down by Roman Jakobson in the concept of the [[Seminar XIshifter]], to distinguish between the subject of the statement and the subject of the enunciation.

[[Category:Linguistic theory]][[Category:Symbolic]][[Category:Jacques Lacan]]