Main trends of research in the social and human ... - unesdoc - Unesco

General problems of interdisciplinary research and common mechanisms 5 19
structures of the intelligence, for example - is a process of gradual equilibration :
this being so, the nearer the structure under consideration is to its state of
final closure (which, it should be added, in no wise excludes the possibility of
its being subsequently integrated into new structures) the more closely, of course
does the synchronic balance depend upon this same self-regulating process. We
have seen an intermediate situation (section 14) in the case of values, whose
dependence upon their history increases the more closely they are linked with
structures (normative values) and the less nearly they correspond to the needs
of a changing function. As for the ‘signifiants’ that operate in systems of mean-
ing, it is obvious that the more conventional or ‘arbitrary’ they are, the more
subordinate to the needs of the moment and the more independent of the pre-
vious history they wil be. It is therefore in these situations that we find the
minimum of relationship between present balance and diachrony. This can be
seen, for instance, in a system of artificial, technical signs such as mathematical
language. Fundamentally, the choice of signs such as AxB, A.B or AB to
express multiplication, or of any particular sign for other operations, depends
only on the conventions of the time, and not on the history of symbols, which
in any case comprises series of transformations that are explicable, but usually
linked to the very overall balance of the system at each period under considera-
tion; fidelity to the past may even be a disturbing factor rather than a useful
one, if it hinders the reorganization of perspectives, which would on the contrary
be facilitated by a new symbolism.
It is true that ‘signifiants’ can be divided, as F. de Saussure pointed out (and
Beirce earlier, although his method of classification does not seem so logical)
into motivated ‘symbols’ and arbitrary ‘signs’, and that there are transition
series between the two. The very notion of the arbitrary nature of the sign has
given rise to discussion, by Jespersen in the past and by Jakobson today. De
Saussure, however, appears to have answered these objections before they were
raised, by himself distinguishing between the ‘relatively arbitrary’ and the
‘radically arbitrary’. Broadly speaking, it does seem to be true that the word
used to designate a concept has not as close a relationship to it (relationship
between the phonic subject and the meaning of the idea) as the concept has with
its meaning and its content. Even if the verbal signs are sometimes accompanied
by symbolism (in the Saussurian sense of a relationship of resemblance or
motivation between that which symbolizes and that which is symbolized) and
even if, as far as the speaker is aware, there is nothing arbitrary about the word
(as Benveniste has pointed out), it seems obvious that the multiplicity of lan-
guages bears witness to this conventional nature of the verbal sign. Signs, more-
over, are always social (explicit or implicit conventions originating in usage),
whereas the symbol may have an individual origin, as in the symbolic games of
children, or in dreams.
The problem raised by linguists of the relationship between synchronic and
diachronic factors in the sphere of relations between structures and meanings is
very broad in scope, and to study it may help us to understand various inter-
disciplinary questions, such as those of the interpretation - which may be lin-
guistic or, on the other hand, operative and constructive - of logical and mathe-