Linguistics ： the tree metaphor vs. the chess metaphor

Question

Two metaphors come to mind when describing language evolution.The first is the tree metaphor,borrowed from biology,according to which languages of a given family can be related to one another as part of a family tree.The second is the chess metaphor,which de Saussure used to introduce one of his dichotomies.

- Which is this particular Saussurean dichotomy?

- Both metaphors have limitations.They can be extended unduly.Show at least three limitations in total for those two metaphors.

Thanks for helping me answer these questions!

Mister Micawber · Accepted Answer

You can find some information [url=http://www.google.co.jp/search?q=%22chess+metaphor+de+Saussure%22&hl=en&num=10&lr=&ft=i&cr=&safe=images&tbs=] HERE[/url] by opening the PDF file and putting 'chess' in the search box.

Anonymous · Answer

The dichotomy referred to is the one between diacrony and syncrony.

According to Saussure's chess metaphor, a 'new (state of) language' (syncrony) is like a fresh position in a chess game.
Each position in a game, even if it originates from a previous position, has no longer anything to do with the position it came from. Being a system, each position (and each language) can be understood only by itself.

Linguistic changes, chess moves or diacronic facts are irrelevant for the syncronic study of language.

Aparently, both metaphors imply clear cut stages in languages and tend to overlook the temporal overlappings and the inertialities that are however always present in a language (for ex., older versions that go on being spoken alongside the newer versions).

Many more observations could obviously be made: showing not that these metaphors have limitations and are undue, but that they are openended and creative...

Linguistics ： the tree metaphor vs. the chess metaphor

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions