De Saussure is considered to be one of the greatest names in modern linguisticsafter he set detailed investigations on sign language and the notion of arbitrariness. According to him, sign comprises a concept and a sound pattern better known as the signified and the signifier respectively. For instance, when we mention the term‘cow,’ the animal is the signifier, and the concept of a mammal created in our minds is the signified. This nature of sign in language is what is arbitrary. To expound on this, the arbitrariness of a sign seems to mean that there is no reasonable relationship between the sound pattern and the concept or the signified. This paper will aim at ascertaining how sign has no significant impacts on the Saussurean arbitrariness. It will do so by describing how language is arbitrary as well as exploring various languages and conventions concerning countries or regions.

Before studying language and its arbitrariness, it is worth observing the characteristics of a sign. Some of these features might have been highlighted, but it is essential to bring them in a context that would make the reader understand why signs do not pose problems to the Saussurean arbitrariness. Firstly, sign language is binary. This means that it is made of the signifier and the implied. Secondly, there is no cause for the signifier to be linked to a concept. Another important feature worth noting about the sign is that it is relational. This means that it only makes sense in relation to another sign. Lastly, signs define things by what they are not rather than what they actually are.

An extensive study of why language is arbitrary will reveal why Saussure’s notion of unpredictability does not seem to be invalidated by iconicity present in sign language. Concerning the universal rules and consistencies, language appears to rely on associations of word meanings derived from various cultural conventions. To understand this concept further and how it contributes to the invalidation of Saussure’s notion, linguistic research shows that it is the structure and use of language and sign that creates a difference between being non-arbitrary and indiscriminate (Monaghan et al. 368). For instance, ‘fish’ as a word may be used in various ways which are independent of each other. This means that a person may use the term as a signifier or as a signified. When utilized as a signifier, it creates the notion of sign language. For example, we may say, let us go to the river and fish. On the other hand, ‘ fish’ can be used to create a concept at the back of our minds by being used as a signified. For example, fish is an aquatic creature which is edible. This shows that Saussure’s notion of unpredictability does not seem to be affected by iconicity of a sign language.

Lastly, languages rely a lot on cultural conventions. This means that different languages from various regions have distinct conventions that can and at times do change. This explains why there are a variety of languages in the first place. So, learners of the second language should consider a variety of factors because as they are striving to familiarize themselves with the additional language, they might fall into the trap of using unintended meanings, especially when dealing with homographs. For instance, the word bear might mean an animal in the UK but also ‘to tolerate’ in the US. Thus, a Briton should keep this in mind while learning American English. This reliance on cultural conventions is also an indication that sign has no significant impact on the Saussurean arbitrariness.

Work Cited

Monaghan, Padraic, et al. “How arbitrary is language?.” Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 369.1651 (2014): 20130299.

Do you need an Original High Quality Academic Custom Essay?