Semiotics for Beginners by Daniel Chandler

Semiotics for Beginners by Daniel Chandler
• Formal marking. In morphologically related oppositions, marking is based on the presence or
absence of some particular formal feature. The marked signifier is formed by adding a
distinctive feature to the unmarked signifier (for instance, the marked form 'unhappy' is formed
by adding the prefix un- to the unmarked signifier 'happy') (Greenberg 1966; Clark & Clark,
1977; Lyons 1977, 305ff).
• Distributional marking. Formally marked terms show a tendency to be more restricted in the
range of contexts in which they occur (Lyons 1977, 306-307).
In English, linguistically unmarked forms include the present tense of verbs and the singular form of
nouns. The active voice is normally unmarked, although in the restricted genre of traditional academic
writing the passive voice is still often the unmarked form.
The markedness of linguistic signs includes semantic marking: a marked or unmarked status applies
not only to signifiers but also to signifieds. According to 'the binary thesis' 'a signified's content is
determined by a series of binary contrasts in which one term is marked and the other unmarked'
(Holdcroft 1991, 127). With morphologically related pairings there is an obvious relation between
formal and semantic marking, and John Lyons suggests that distributional marking in oppositions is
probably determined by semantic marking (Lyons 1977, 307). One form of semantic marking relates
to specificity. The unmarked term is often used as a generic term whilst the marked term is used in a
more specific sense. General references to humanity used to use the term 'Man' (which in this sense
was not intended to be sex-specific), and of course the word 'he' has long been used generically. In
English the female category is generally marked in relation to the male, a point not lost on feminist
theorists (Clark & Clark 1977, 524). Lyons notes, however, that it is not always the female term which
is marked - he refers to several farmyard animals as exceptions - bull, cock, ram and drake -
suggesting that this is perhaps because such animals are normally reared in smaller numbers (Lyons
1977, 308).
Where terms are paired the pairing is rarely symmetrical but rather hierarchical. With apologies to
George Orwell we might coin the phrase that 'all signifieds are equal, but some are more equal than
others'. With many of the familiarly paired terms, the two signifieds are accorded different values. The
unmarked term is primary, being given precedence and priority, whilst the marked term is treated as
secondary or even suppressed and excluded as an 'absent signifier'. When morphological cues (such
as un- or -in) are lacking, the 'preferred sequence' or most common order of paired terms usually
distinguishes the first as a semantically positive term and the second as a negative one (Lyons 1977,
276; Malkiel 1968). 'Term B' is referred to by some theorists as being produced as an 'effect' of 'Term
A'. The unmarked term is presented as fundamental and originative whilst the marked term 'is
conceived in relation to it' as derivative, dependent, subordinate, supplemental or ancillary (Culler
1985, 112; Adams 1989, 142). This framing ignores the fact that the unmarked term is logically and
structurally dependent on the marked term to lend it substance. Even the arch-structuralist Lévi-
Strauss acknowledged that 'the very notion of opposition implies that the two forms were originally
conceived of as complementary terms, forming a part of the same classification' (in Lane 1970, 202).
Derrida demonstrated that within the oppositional logic of binarism neither of the terms (or concepts)
makes sense without the other. This is what he calls 'the logic of supplementarity': the 'secondary'
term which is represented as 'marginal' and external is in fact constitutive of the 'primary' term and
essential to it (Derrida 1976). The unmarked term is defined by what it seeks to exclude.
Consequently, the boundaries of foundational oppositions, seemingly 'absolute', have to be policed
because 'transgressions' are inevitable (Eagleton 1983, 133).