Russell Daylight | Western Sydney University (original) (raw)

Books by Russell Daylight

Between 1907 and 1911, Ferdinand de Saussure gave three series of lectures on the topic of genera... more Between 1907 and 1911, Ferdinand de Saussure gave three series of lectures on the topic of general linguistics. After his death, these lecture notes were gathered together by his students and published as the Course in General Linguistics. And in the past one hundred years, there has been no more influential and divisive reading of Saussure than that of Jacques Derrida.

This book is an examination of Derrida’s philosophical reconstruction of Saussurean linguistics, of the paradigm shift from structuralism to post-structuralism, and of the consequences that continue to resonate in every field of the humanities today.

Despite the importance of Derrida’s critique of Saussure for cultural studies, philosophy, linguistics and literary theory, no comprehensive analysis has before been written. The magnitude of the task undertaken here makes this book an invaluable resource for those wishing to interrogate the encounter beyond appearances or received wisdom.

In this process of a close reading, the following themes become sites of debate between Derrida and Saussure:
- the originality of Saussure within the history of Western metaphysics
- the relationship between speech and writing
- the relationship between différance and difference
- the intervention of time in structuralism
- linguistic relativism and the role of the language user.

This long-overdue commentary also poses new questions to structuralism and post-structuralism, and opens up exciting new terrain in linguistic and political thought.

Papers by Russell Daylight

Perhaps the best known and most influential of Jacques Derrida’s early, linguistically-oriented c... more Perhaps the best known and most influential of Jacques Derrida’s early, linguistically-oriented critiques concerns the relationship between writing and speech. This inquiry is directed towards a certain thread in the history of philosophy in which priority is given to spoken language over the written. It is Saussurean linguistics in particular that allows Derrida to posit the interdependence of phonocentrism, or the privilege of speech over writing, with logocentrism, or the desire for a true and universal experience of the world in the mind prior to the introduction of language. However, a close reading of this engagement suggests that Saussure might be phonocentric but not logocentric, and indeed, that it is possible to be phonocentric but not logocentric. 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

What is the relationship between semiotics and semiology? Received wisdom tells us that the &quo... more What is the relationship between semiotics and semiology? Received wisdom tells us that the "semiotics" of Charles Sanders Peirce largely overlaps in function and meaning with the "semiology" of Ferdinand de Saussure. Among semioticians more attentive to the nuances of each system, such as Sebeok, Deely, and Eco, semiology occupies that part of semiotics which relates either to conventional communication, or intentional communication, or some other subset of semiotic acts. In this essay I aim to demonstrate quite a different relation between the two fields of study. Drawing upon close readers of Saussure such as Harris and Weber, I will contrast semiotics as an act of "representation" with semiology as an act of "articulation". What I will propose is that semiotics and semiology form wholly separate but contiguous domains of explanation.

Chinese Semiotic Studies

The unification of the theory of semiotics has been an ambition of the IASS-AIS since the First W... more The unification of the theory of semiotics has been an ambition of the IASS-AIS since the First World Congress in 1974. In his Preface to the Proceedings, Umberto Eco set the participants with certain fundamental tasks, including “providing the discipline with a unified methodology and a unified objective.” At the Second Congress, however, the multitude of topics and approaches led to the prevailing question of the Closing Session: “Can Semiotics Be Unified?” By the Fifth Congress the organizers would claim that theoretical differences “served to strengthen rather than to divide.” This paper traces the origin of this disunity to the writings of Aristotle and their interpretation by late classical and medieval theologians. Received wisdom tells us that linguistic semiology forms a part of general semiotics – the part dealing with either linguistic or conventional signs. This paper overturns that view, demonstrating that (linguistic) relations of equivalence and (semiotic) relations o...

An exploration of how Jewish material cultural in Eastern Poland, from pre-Holocaust to Contempor... more An exploration of how Jewish material cultural in Eastern Poland, from pre-Holocaust to Contemporary times, illuminates Jewish identity and makes memory for the future. ... What if Derrida was wrong about Saussure? ... This paper critiques Derrida's reading of Saussure, offering ...

Journal of Language, Literature and Culture, 2014

Literacy and Numeracy Studies

Recent government initiatives have required universities to include specific literacy and numerac... more Recent government initiatives have required universities to include specific literacy and numeracy targets for the students. The authors – both members of the English discipline at Charles Sturt University – were invited to develop and run a two-semester program for all students studying to become early childhood, primary, and secondary teachers. This article outlines the nature of the two subjects which comprise the program: the first focused on reading and comprehension, the second on writing and composition. These subjects were conceived from collegial dialogues between academics in education and the humanities, and then developed from these different assumptions and starting points. Over the last five years, the shared experiences of teaching these prospective teachers has grown into a strongly coherent first year of study. This article seeks the describe the experiences of teaching literacy to first-year education students, and it is by turns hypothesising and speculative, refl...

Literacy and Numeracy Studies, 2020

Chinese Semiotic Studies, 2017

The unification of the theory of semiotics has been an ambition of the IASS-AIS since the First ... more The unification of the theory of semiotics has been an ambition of the
IASS-AIS since the First World Congress in 1974. In his Preface to the
Proceedings, Umberto Eco set the participants with certain fundamental tasks,
including “providing the discipline with a unified methodology and a unified
objective.” At the Second Congress, however, the multitude of topics and
approaches led to the prevailing question of the Closing Session: “Can Semiotics
Be Unified?” By the Fifth Congress the organizers would claim that theoretical
differences “served to strengthen rather than to divide.” This paper traces the
origin of this disunity to the writings of Aristotle and their interpretation by late
classical and medieval theologians. Received wisdom tells us that linguistic
semiology forms a part of general semiotics – the part dealing with either
linguistic or conventional signs. This paper overturns that view, demonstrating
that (linguistic) relations of equivalence and (semiotic) relations of implication
operate in perpendicular planes of semiosis, intersecting at the point of the
thing itself. These two planes of semiosis exist as unconnected theories in
Aristotle, but become conflated in Augustine. This paper resolves the
relationship between semiotics and semiology and in doing so, provides a
unified methodology and objective.

When we press the “a” key on our computer keyboard, an “a” appears on our screen almost simultane... more When we press the “a” key on our computer keyboard, an “a” appears on our screen almost simultaneously. In between those two points there are a number of layers of computer program which communicate with each other: the keyboard controller sends a message to the operating system which is interpreted by a word processor, which then returns a message to the operating system, which communicates with the video controller and the video board sends a message that it needs an “a” and this is mapped as a group of pixels which light up on the screen. Except that none of this actually happens. At the level of physical reality, all that happens is the shifting of magnetic fields and the passing of electrons. The electrons orbiting atoms slide from one atom to the next along wires, among silicon and metal. Entities like computer programs and operating systems are abstractions, layers of abstractions in fact, on top of a brute reality. In this paper I argue that this is the appropriate starting point for understanding the role of semiotics in negotiating reality. Taking examples from computer science, visual perception and language, this inquiry considers what kind of abstraction we want semiotics to be. It is found that “the semiotic abstraction” allows us to understand semiotic systems as machines for creating differences, and semiotics itself as the primordial science of meaning.

Introduction to the special issue of Semiotica on the 100th anniversary of the publication of the... more Introduction to the special issue of Semiotica on the 100th anniversary of the publication of the Course in General Linguistics

One of the less obvious contributions of Saussure is his role in establishing modern communicatio... more One of the less obvious contributions of Saussure is his role in establishing modern communications theory. The sender-message-receiver (SMR) model of communication was developed by Claude Shannon and Warren Weaver (1949). Within the humanities, it is Roman Jakobson's version of the SMR model which is most influential. Jakobson's model creates a methodology for considering such complexities as the sender's intentions, the context of transmission, metalinguistic codes, the transmission medium, and the relation to the referent. Despite the complexity of Jakobson's model, it is still bound by the assumption that perfect communication can be achieved through the full recovery of contexts. The most thorough and powerful critique of what's often called the " transmission model " of communication is found in Jacques Derrida's " Signature Event Context " (1988). Derrida's critique begins by demonstrating " why a context is never absolutely determinable " (3). In place of context, Derrida proposes the notion of " dissemination " in which a text is radically adrift of the conditions of its utterance or reception. At face value, Saussure's " speech circuit " model represents an early and underdeveloped model of communication. As if often the case, however, a closer reading of the Cours reveals something far more radical and profound. Closer attention to Saussure's speech circuit model reopens many questions in communication theory, and in associated fields such as literary theory, cultural studies, and semiotics.

Saussure famously characterises language as both " mutable " and " immutable. " Any individual is... more Saussure famously characterises language as both " mutable " and " immutable. " Any individual is free to coin a phrase or use a word in a new way, but it is only the linguistic community as a whole which can ratify the new expression, give it social currency and legitimation.

What do people mean when they use the word " democracy " ? From a survey of usage, we discover th... more What do people mean when they use the word " democracy " ? From a survey of usage, we discover that democracy is a highly contestable notion. It is spoken of simultaneously as a moral principle, a state of being, and a system of government. But if democracy is a vigorously contested notion, it is not a hopelessly contested notion. Certain regular distinctions begin to emerge, with the most important being that between " liberal democracy " and " popular democracy. " Democracy today exists as a concept at war with itself. The resultant crisis for democrats is that they are forced to defend liberal values against popular reform. My own view is that democracy is best understood as pharmakon – as both poison and cure. My overall ambition in this paper, however, is not necessarily to defend one definition against another, but only to ask how we might proceed. In this sense, I want to address Jacques Derrida's question of : " can one and/or must one speak democratically of democracy? "

Language and Communication, Jul 2012

Perhaps the best known and most influential of Jacques Derrida’s early, linguistically-oriented c... more Perhaps the best known and most influential of Jacques Derrida’s early, linguistically-oriented critiques concerns the relationship between writing and speech. Derrida’s inquiry is directed towards a certain thread in the history of philosophy in which priority is given to spoken language over the written. It is Saussurean linguistics in particular that allows Derrida to posit the interdependence of phonocentrism, or the privilege of speech over writing, with logocentrism, or the desire for a true and universal experience of the world in the mind prior to the introduction of language. However, a close reading of this engagement suggests that Saussure might be phonocentric but not logocentric, and indeed, that it is possible to be phonocentric but not logocentric.

This long-overdue commentary also poses new questions to structuralism and post-structuralism, and opens up exciting new terrain in linguistic and political thought.

Chinese Semiotic Studies

Journal of Language, Literature and Culture, 2014

Literacy and Numeracy Studies

Literacy and Numeracy Studies, 2020

Chinese Semiotic Studies, 2017

Language and Communication, Jul 2012

Perhaps the best known and most influential of Jacques Derrida’s early, linguistically-oriented c... more Perhaps the best known and most influential of Jacques Derrida’s early, linguistically-oriented critiques concerns the relationship between writing and speech. Derrida’s inquiry is directed towards a certain thread in the history of philosophy in which priority is given to spoken language over the written. It is Saussurean linguistics in particular that allows Derrida to posit the interdependence of phonocentrism, or the privilege of speech over writing, with logocentrism, or the desire for a true and universal experience of the world in the mind prior to the introduction of language. However, a close reading of this engagement suggests that Saussure might be phonocentric but not logocentric, and indeed, that it is possible to be phonocentric but not logocentric.

International Journal of the Humanities, 2006

By far the dominant reading of Saussure today is Derrida's. But what if Derrida was wrong about S... more By far the dominant reading of Saussure today is Derrida's. But what if Derrida was wrong about Saussure, or at least, if Derrida's reading was limited? What if, for example, Derrida went too far in incorporating Saussure within a "classical semiology," which is itself of doubtful unity? Or if it were possible to separate phonocentrism from logocentrism? What if Saussure did not reproduce a transcendental signified, that is, a concept independent of language? What if Saussurean theory does not join a sign to a referent, or betray a nostalgia for presence? It is clear why Saussure was necessary for
Derrida's legitimate project of identifying logocentric presuppositions in even the most careful projects of anti-metaphysics. But an unfortunate result of Derrida's efforts is that the true specificity and originality of Saussure - in his approach to the language user - continues to be overlooked. I feel that the dominance of the Derridean reading of Saussure has meant that certain explorations in structuralism were extinguished before they even began, and that there are some extremely difficult but rewarding ways of thinking that a new reading of Saussure can offer us now; a reinvigoration of certain possibilities of Saussurean thought which have been compressed into the logocentric framework. Above all, it is to rethink Saussure's forgotten dictum, that "In order to determine to what extent something is a reality, it is necessary and also sufficient to find out to what extent it exists as far as the language users are concerned."

When we press the " a " key on our computer keyboard, an " a " appears on our screen almost insta... more When we press the " a " key on our computer keyboard, an " a " appears on our screen almost instantaneously. In between those two points there are a number of layers of computer program which communicate with each other: the keyboard controller sends a message to the operating system which is interpreted by a word processor, which then returns a message to the operating system, which communicates with the video controller and the video board sends a message that it needs an " a " and this is mapped as a group of pixels which light up on the screen. Except that none of this actually happens. At the level of physical reality, all that happens is the shifting of magnetic fields and the passing of electrons. The electrons orbiting atoms slide from one atom to the next along wires, among silicon and metal. Entities like computer programs and operating systems are abstractions, layers of abstractions in fact, on top of a brute reality. In this paper I argue that this is the appropriate starting point for understanding the role of semiotics in negotiating reality. Taking examples from computer science, visual perception and language, this inquiry considers what kind of abstraction we want semiotics to be. It is found that " the semiotic abstraction " allows us to understand semiotic systems as machines for creating differences, and semiotics itself as the primordial science of meaning.

"Saussure famously characterises language as both “mutable” and “immutable.” Any individual is fr... more "Saussure famously characterises language as both “mutable” and “immutable.” Any individual is free to coin a phrase or use a word in a new way, but it is only the linguistic community as a whole which can ratify the new expression, give it social currency and legitimation. In a language, rhetorical force is constantly being applied by speakers of a language: by writers, film-makers, politicians, and academics. At the same time, resistance to linguistic innovation is being applied by the language community as a whole: in conversation, on Wikipedia and on talkback radio. Expressions such as “collateral damage,” “rogue state,” or “queue-jumper,” can only be given currency, force, or legitimation, by the community of speakers of a language.

It’s little wonder, then, that the Saussurean scholar Roy Harris says that the role of the individual in making a language is remarkably similar to the role of the individual in a nation-state. He writes:

"We are dealing with a model which assigns to the individual, vis à vis la langue a role which matches exactly the socio-political role assigned to the individual vis à vis the institutions of the modern nation state. As a member, an individual can do no more than what the community, through its institutions, makes it possible for an individual to do." (Reading Saussure 216)

Harris’s analogy naturally suggests the concept of the “language-citizen.” A language-citizen would be a speaker of a language who makes choices in their language use, who may either ratify or resist linguistic innovation. The notion of the language-citizen is a way of measuring the depth and breadth of community participation in the construction of meaning, and in the making and remaking of worlds."