Semiotics for Beginners by Daniel Chandler

Semiotics for Beginners by Daniel Chandler
'double articulated' system) the function of these lower units is purely to differentiate the minimal
meaningful units. In language, the phonemes /b/, /p/ and /t/ are elements of second articulation, the
function of which is to distinguish between words, such as /pin/, /bin/ and /tin/, which are elements of
the first articulation of language. In language, the level of second articulation is thus a phonological
level.
Semiotic codes have either single articulation, double articulation or no articulation. Double
articulation enables a semiotic code to form an infinite number of meaningful combinations using a
small number of low-level units (offering economy and power). The infinite use of finite elements is a
feature which in relation to media in general has been referred to as 'semiotic economy'. Traditional
definitions ascribe double articulation only to human language, for which this is regarded as a key
'design feature' (Hockett 1958; Hockett 1960; Hockett 1965). Louis Hjelmslev regarded it as an
essential and defining feature of language (Hjelmslev 1961). Double articulation is seen as being
largely responsible for the creative economy of language. Language is a semiotic system which is
highly economical - employing only a small number of signs. Amongst other advantages, linguistic
economy facilitates learning and recall. As for creativity, language is infinitely productive. The English
language, for instance, has only about 40 or 50 elements of second articulation (phonemes) but these
can generate hundreds of thousands of words. Similarly, from a limited vocabulary we can generate
an infinite number of sentences (subject to the constraint of syntax which governs structurally valid
combinations). Consequently, as Noam Chomsky has noted, the creative economy of language gives
us the power to endlessly generate sentences which we have never encountered before. It is by
combining words in multiple ways that we can seek to render the particularity of experience. If we had
individual words to represent every particularity we would have to have an infinite number of them,
which would exceed our capability of learning, recalling and manipulating them. John Lyons
comments that 'duality, as it operates in language, is also bound up with arbitrariness. If each
phonological element in a given form had to bear an identifiable iconic relationship, whether
conventional or natural, to some aspect of its meaning, it is obvious that there would be severe
constraints upon the possibility of combining phonological elements with one another' (Lyons 1977,
74). Roman Jakobson observed that
In the combination of linguistic units there is an ascending scale of freedom. In the combination
of distinctive features into phonemes, the freedom of the individual speaker is zero: the code
has already established all the possibilities which may be utilized in the given language.
Freedom to combine phonemes into words is circumscribed; it is limited to the marginal
situation of word coinage. In forming sentences with words the speaker is less constrained.
And finally, in the combination of sentences into utterances, the action of compulsory
syntactical rules ceases, and the freedom of any individual speaker to create novel contexts
increases substantially, although... the numerous stereotyped utterances are not to be
overlooked. (Jakobson & Halle 1956, 74)
As Jakobson notes, even beyond the level of the sentence, the ways in which we use words are
subject to linguistic conventions which limit the possibilities open to us. If we depart too far from the
norms, we may fail to communicate.
Double articulation does not seem to occur in the natural communication systems of animals other
than humans. As to other human semiotic systems with double articulation, Nöth notes that these
include systematic codes used in library or warehouse catalogues, and 'many codes of data-