While
LANGUE could be the rules of, say, English grammar, it does not mean PAROLE
always has to conform to the rules of standard English (what some people
erroneously call 'proper' English). LANGUE is less rigid than the phrase 'set
of rules' implies, it is more a guideline and is inferred from the PAROLE.
-Nick
Lacey
Langue
and parole are Ferdinand de Saussure’s classic distinction in structural
linguistics.
- Langue
is the underlying, shared system of a language: its abstract conventions,
patterns, and possibilities (grammar, vocabulary, sound system, etc.) that
exist in the minds of a speech community. It is the social, collective “code.”
- Parole
is the concrete, individual act of speaking or writing—the actual utterances
people produce in real situations.
Nick
Lacey’s point is that treating LANGUE as a rigid, prescriptive “set of
rules” (especially the rules of standardized or “proper” English or any other
language for that matter) is a misunderstanding. LANGUE is better
understood as a flexible system of guidelines and possibilities that is itself
abstracted from observing PAROLE—from how people actually use
language. Real speech and writing (parole) routinely include non-standard
forms, dialect features, creative deviations, errors, innovations, and informal
styles. These do not fall outside language; they are part of the data from
which the system (langue) is inferred and continually revised.
In short: the quote rejects a narrow, schoolroom view of “correct English” as the true LANGUE. LANGUE is descriptive and living, derived from usage rather than imposed as an unbreakable rulebook that every instance of parole must obey.
[Langue, Parole, Ferdinand de Saussure, Correct English, Nick Lacey, Quote, Linguistics]
Comments
Post a Comment