sign in sign up
<<
Home , Deconstruction, Ferdinand de Saussure, Linguistics

Revista Comunicación. Volumen 17, año 29, No. 1, Enero-Julio, 2008 (pp. 29-41) 29

Deconstruction and figurative : An of the way language works

Karla Araya Araya Universidad de Costa Rica [email protected]

Recibido: 19-XI-07 / Aprobado: 27-III-08 Abstract Resumen Far from discussing whether is Deconstrucción y figuras literarias: Un análi- obscure, dogmatic or a problematic approach, the sis de la forma en que trabaja la lengua aim of this article is to demonstrate that the use of figurative language constitutes a clear exam- Karla Araya Araya ple of the deconstructive processes undertaken in El presente artículo tiene como objetivo prin- the processes of -making. When people cipal demostrar que las figuras literarias, que tan try to express and share their and feelings frecuentemente usamos para expresar nuestras about their world, language acquires more mean- ideas, constituyen un ejemplo claro de la forma ings than the literal ones. Firstly, a brief histori- deconstrucionista como utilizamos la lengua cal background on the development and interests para comunicarnos y para crear significados. of is provided to evidence the struc- Inicialmente, se realiza una revisión básica sobre tural view upon which studies and conceptions el desarrollo histórico de la lingüística in términos about language have been based on. Also, a theo- de los intereses de varias disciplinas relacionadas retical juxtaposition between and con ésta y sus visiones de la naturaleza de la len- deconstruction is developed in order to establish gua. Además, se desarrolla una contraposición Palabras clave: the impact they have in the way language works teórica entre los postulados del estructuralismo y estructuralismo, deconstruc- through the use of figurative language. Then, an la deconstrucción para establecer el impacto que ción, figuras literarias, lengua, analysis –in terms of deconstruction- of some of estas teorías han tenido en la concepción de la lingüística, reconstrucción, the most common literary figures (metaphor, simile, lenguaje figurativo. forma como la lengua funciona. Seguidamente, se personification, paradox, hyperbole, metonymy, analizan y relacionan los principios deconstruc- synecdoche, allegory and ) is provided. cionistas con respecto a la naturaleza y uso de las KeY : Finally, it is concluded that using figurative lan- figuras literarias. Finalmente, se concluye que el structuralism, deconstruction, guage represents an act of deconstructing con- uso de figuras literarias representa un claro ejem- literary figures, language, ventional meaning. Literal meaning is destroyed plo de reconstrucción, debido a que el significado linguistics, reconstruction, to generate different significations to words and convencional de las palabras se destruye a partir figurative language. to the world. de las múltiples y diferentes significaciones que las personas asignan a éstas. 30 Deconstruction and figurative language: An analysis of the way language works

INTRODUCTION: A GENERAL processes undertaken in the con- separate from LINGUISTIC BACKGROUND stitution, creation, function and , synchrony from dia- use of language. In this regard, chrony, child language from The study and perception of ponders that adult language, and so on, language have been eclipsed by constantly bearing in the different principles linguistics Since language is such a that interactions exist that and disciples have devel- complex phenomenon, it has eventually have to be taken oped and proposed. Throughout been necessary to narrow the into account. We then go to the time, there have been many field of study to make it man- formulate for these attempts to explain the complex ageable. Thus we commonly domains –a for syntax, Revista Comunicación. Volumen 17, año 29, No. 1, Enero-Julio, 2008 (pp. 29-41) 31

a theory for phonology, a the- pand some other language proper- pioneers. He that “the ory for - ties like arbitrariness, différance, inner form of language (innere knowing all the while that the duality, tension, discreteness and Sprachform) is a fundamental ultimate goal is to encompass socio-cultural constitution in the component of the human spirit all these subfields in one theo- study of language. Rather than and every language form, then, ry of language. (2001: 1) thinking of language as an orga- can be considered as a way to nized structural system, language characterize speaking groups” Even though the development has a social constitution that makes (Leroy 1976: 52). Author’s trans- of the linguistic field has been of it a very complex phenomenon. lation. In other words, language marked by different trends and As Joan Bybee states “language is the manifestation of the human interests, the main general cor- use includes not just the process- spirit. Far from developing a dif- pus conception about language ing of language, but all the social ferent position about the compo- has been maintained. Language and international uses to which sition of language, Humboldt’s has been considered an organic language is put” (2001: 2). The ideas had strong repercussions on composition; that is, a systematic historical development of linguis- which justified racist theo- construct. Most of language stud- tics has emphasized the function- ries. The premises concerning the ies have implicitly or explicitly as- ing and characteristics of language grammatical systematization of sumed that the construction and following the notions of derivation language were never questioned; use of language operate in struc- and essence –mostly- which has that is why, Humboldt “was inter- tural terms. Because the configu- supported a logocentric position ested in the structural differences ration of language has not tradi- about the world. among ” (Leroy 1976: tionally questioned, the interests 53) Author’s . of linguists have been oriented to Since the eighteenth century, study the apparent structural com- linguistics has been marked by By the year 1870, the develop- ponents of language: semantic, the study of . A lot of ment of linguistics took a different , phonology, , work was done under the sys- direction. This field grammar, syntax, and so on. All tematical approach proposed by these components of language ex- Panini. Arturo Agüero states that Abandon[ed] the romantic plain linguistic processes follow- the Panini’s grammar was based conceptions about the purity ing the theoretical precepts of their on a deep and detailed study of of the “primitive” language disciplines but taking for granted the grammatical components of and rejecting to do genetic the organized structural nature of language which main concern analysis of the grammatical language. The frameworks of these was “to analyze words in terms of forms; it is proposed that com- disciples are organized under the their parts (, theme, heritage). parative grammar does not common assumption of lan- Such study was sometimes em- deal with the confrontation guage as a structure. By presup- phasized on everything related to of languages under an origi- posing that language implies an the formation of roots” (1997: 11) nal idealized system. Instead, organization of different elements, Author’s translation. The Panini’s it is a procedure that can be terms such as essence, , rea- meticulous work was developed used to reconstruct the son and origin have been used to as a model in the field of linguistic of languages belonging to the venerate logocentric . studies. The result of such gram- same family.” (Leroy 1976: 57) matical view of language the Author’s translation In this sense, it is necessary bases for comparative analysis to develop critical analyses that “working as a point of reference This new linguistic perception could open the field of linguistics … it proposed along with the was called neogrammar. August to some other possibilities about the birth of the Scheleicher’s work present the the chaotic constitution and use real linguistics” (Agüero 1977: 12) first scientific attempts to recon- of language. The assumptions re- Author’s translation. struct a genealogic tree among lated to the structural language- Indo-European languages; that is, organization need to be enriched Other approaches to study lan- the first theoretical formulations with other perspectives about lan- guage were related to the “spirit” about the of language. guage functioning and usage as of speaking communities. In this insisted that lan- those proposed by deconstruction; regard, guage was a collective product a view that could include and ex- is considered one of the main with a common root. They “main- 32 Deconstruction and figurative language: An analysis of the way language works

tain the interest on the formal as- and sentences. In semantic –entity affected by the action: pects of language, the formal and analysis, there is always an cook- do not match their corre- material structure of words …; they attempt to on what the sponding semantic features. In se- consider that a meticulous study of words conventionally mean, mantic terms, a dog is an animate the actual condition of language rather than on what a speaker entity that does not possess human –from a static perspective- lead might want words to mean like characteristics as a cook does. to the development of a dynamic on a particular occasion. This Then the roles the and the (historical) linguistics” (Salvat ed. technical approach to mean- theme accomplish in this 1973: 49) Author’s translation. ing emphasizes the objec- are conventional incorrect; there tive and the general. It avoids is no lexical relationship between Neogrammarians were strongly the subjective and the local. a dog and a cook. concerned with the analysis and Linguistic deals proclamation of phonetic . with the conventional mean- In the first decade of the 1900s, The main emphasis of this group ing conveyed by the use of the study of language triggered was to study the evolution and words and sentences of a lan- a reformation in the orienta- transformation of language-com- guage. (1996: 114) tion and aim of linguistic works. munities in order to provide com- Considered the father of modern paratists with a set of phonetic This discipline was more inter- linguistics, rules. The comparative studies car- ested in characterizing concep- established a between ried out under those laws provided tual meaning than in develop- the structure of a speaking com- a uniformed view of language. ing analytic accounts of rules or munity language –langue- and the But little by little, the reliability of of the overall structure of words. ’s actual –parole- studies was ques- Semantics helped to establish the declaring that “the proper study of tioned because “the exceptions differences between syntactic and linguistics is the system (langue), to the ‘rule’, the abnormalities - meaningful constructions. In other not the individual of its in prediction- justified the lack of words, it clarified that one thing speakers (parole)” (Bressler 1999: accuracy, the disdain about uni- was to have syntactically correct 92). Even though Saussure did not formity and the over-exaggerated linguistic structures, and another, abandon the diachronic perspec- use of rules” (Leroy 1976: 58-59) to construct semantically good tive of language –examination re- Author’s translation. constructions. lated to phonetic changes in Indo- European languages-, he empha- During the late nineteenth cen- But semantics also operates un- sized the synchronism which ap- tury, other important disciplines der the principles of order and the proaches the constitution and his- emerged as innovative ways to systematization of the essential torical development of language study language. Semantics was components of the meaning con- in terms of the way it operates. one of those new approaches. veyed by the literal use of a . The operability of language did Michel Bréal was one of the first Semantics proposes that the prob- not relay on the mimetic theory scholars coining this term. He de- lems of signification are caused by of language structure but on clared that “linguists had mainly the construction of “inappropri- composed by two parts: signifier demonstrated their great shrewd- ate lexical relationships; that is, and signified. This new perspec- ness to study the body and form of words are not used according to tive developed the called words. However, the rules govern- what they denote and connote in semiotics where meaning “can be ing the transformation of , a conventional system of meaning. studied systematically, in terms the selection of new expressions, When words do not convey their of both how this meaning occurs the birth and death of expression conceptual meaning, communica- and the structures that allow it to were still in shadows. Like phonet- tive “abnormalities” are produced. operate” (Bressler 1999: 93). In ics and , the aspects For instance, in the sentence “the other words, Saussurean linguis- related to meaning deserved also a dog is a good cook”, the odd- tics re-organized the configuration : Semantics” (In Leroy 1976: ness of the sentence derives from of other disciplines and proposals 66) Author’s translation. According a transgression of the semantic such as phonetics, grammar and to George Yule, roles words conventionally fulfill. semantics through the re-articula- The role of the agent, the entity tion of their roles in the construc- Semantics is the study of the performing the action -in this case tion of meaning. meaning of words, the dog- and the role of the theme Revista Comunicación. Volumen 17, año 29, No. 1, Enero-Julio, 2008 (pp. 29-41) 33

The twentieth century inher- the structural self-enclosed systems JUXTAPOSED VISIONS OF ited the premises of structuralism. of rules that –according to structur- LANGUAGE According to Joan Bybee, alism- compose language generate an arbitrariness shared by a group Rather than considering words Early in the twentieth cen- of speakers who has mastered the as that mirror the world in tury, a proposal was to distin- structure of langue. That is to say, a liner way, Ferdinand de Saussure guish the shared knowledge arbitrary relationships between asserted that language is primar- that a community of speakers the signifier and the signified are ily determined by its own inter- has from the actual uses to comprehensible because langue nal organization. Saussurean lin- which that knowledge is put is a system that incorporates indi- guistics proposes that language is (de Saussure 1916). May re- vidual speech which components composed by a serious of building searchers then focused their are based on differences. Those blocks (such as , graph- attention on the structure of differences constitute conven- emes, , signs, signifiers, that shared knowledge (called tional points of references among signified) that permit people to ‘langue’ by Saussure and ‘com- who shared a social talk about the world. According petence’ by Chomsky 1965) background. Hence the study of to Saussure, each (signifier) and paid little attention to figurative language should be pat- has a specific and unique sound- language use in real time. The terned –according to structural image as well as an equivalent focus on competence, or the views- under the rules of langue as graphic form that creates its specif- structure of language, turned if it were langue an inner unified ic and unique meaning (signified). out to be extremely produc- whole, and the individual with Consequently, society, , tive. Structuralism provided his/her irregular parole, just an el- , language, life and so on, linguists with a work-shop ement within langue. are aspects governed by the rules of analytic tools for breaking and codes of predefined systems. down the continuous speech But it is precisely such condi- From this perspective, structural- stream into units, and these tion of arbitrariness and difference ism views language as a matter units into features; structur- what generates a philosophical of rules and structures that, when alism postulated to different and epistemological conflict in “correctly” arranged, provide levels of grammar, organizing the conception of language as a meaning. Under the structural- language and the people who well-ruled and organized struc- ist premises, morphology, syntax, study it into fields –phonol- ture. The nature of figurative lan- grammar, phonetics, phonology ogy, morphology, syntax, and guage evidences the exceptions to and semiotics organize language semantics. (2001: 1-2) the rules when conceiving the use to effectively convey meaning. of language as a matter of having Then, the process of communica- The structural views of language arranged structures, individual ut- tion is a well-organized system as well as the aspects associated to terances, sounds and signs. At this its organization, constitution and point, the deconstruction theory However, the Saussurean theory systematization are legacies in can help to enrich linguistic stud- remains a linear relationship be- most of recent theories about lan- ies by providing different percep- tween the signified and the signi- guage. Language is still perceived tions about the way language fier. Its theoretical principles state from a logocentric perspective works, and then, the way people that the parole –individual speech- where meaning is the result of an construct –or deconstruct- mean- is always governed by langue. organic production. ing. To have a less complex no- Hence any parole is going to be tion about the contribution of determined by a specific language Consequently, most of the studies the deconstructionist proposal, it system. As a result, people need to about language and the production becomes necessary to clarify the follow a standard linguistic model of meaning have been done under basic linguistic premises about the to convey meaning. That is why, the –or at least most- premises of functioning and nature of language meaning is conventional. structuralism. Usually, the aspects according to structuralism and de- that represent a “non-standard” or construction. On the other hand, authors such “formal” use of language – as it has as challenged the been mostly assumed the study of STRUCTURALISM AND Saussurean notions about the way figurative language- are perceived DECONSTRUCTION: language works. This French phi- as variations of the . Violating losopher mostly developed a post- 34 Deconstruction and figurative language: An analysis of the way language works

structuralist theory that questions thinking. Contrarily to , are many significations outside the the conception of truth and reality, common sense assumptions are structure. the of , and the ways in not accepted as universal . which meanings are created. As Charles Bressler explains, The application of deconstruc- tion to analysis rejects For deconstruction, meaning- [p]ostmodernist thinkers re- the that language is fully making processes are considered jected modernity’s represen- representative and capable of - dynamic constructs. Meaning can- tation of discourse (the map) ducing a fixed meaning and inter- not be a stable convention –as it and replace it with the collage. pretation. Because deconstruction is proposed by structuralism- be- Unlike the fixed, objective states that there is no essence, cause people constantly recreate nature of a map, a collage’s no correctness and no complete- significance through social inter- meaning is always changing. ness, it can not be possible to find action. Therefore, meaning-mak- Whereas the viewer of a map an organic meaning in language. ing is a chaotic process where no relies on and obtains meaning According to Derrida, word can have an essential signifi- and direction from the map cance. In other words, itself, the viewer of a collage it was probably necessary actually participates in the to begin thought in the form of there is no which production of meaning. And a -present, that the cen- is not embroiled in an open- unlike a map, which allows ter had no natural locus, that ended play of signification, one interpretation of reality, it was not a fixed locus but a shot through with the traces a collage permits many pos- function, a sort of non-locus and fragments of other ideas. sible meanings, for the viewer in which an infinitive It is just that, out of this play can simply juxtapose a of sigh-substitutions came into of signifiers, certain meanings of combinations of images, play. This moment was that in are elevated by social ideolo- thereby constantly changing which language invaded the gies to a privileged position, the meaning of the collage. universal problematic; that or made the centres around Each viewer, then, creates his is which, in the absence of a which other meanings are or her own subjective picture center or origin, everything forced to turn. (Eagleton 1983: of reality. (1993: 118) became discourse –provided 131) we can argue on this word- In other words, poststructuralist that is to say, when everything Deconstructive premises mainly theories -such as deconstruction- became a system where the deal with the of de-centering definitely demolish the logocen- central signified, the original logocentric standards of meaning, tric idea that has dominated all or transcendental signified, is beauty, correctness, truth and real- human behavior and interaction never absolutely present out- ity. This theory rejects the notion –especially in Western -. side the system of differences. that everything has an essence, a Deconstruction does not proclaim The absence of the transcen- basic structure that operates with- the traditional notions of order, or- dental signified extends the in a pre-established system. It is ganization, and unity upon which domain and the interplay of not that deconstruction denies the many people have built their per- signification ad infinitum. of the structures but their ception about the world. In this (1993: 228) stability as if they were conven- sense, Jacques Derrida ponders tions. From a deconstructive view, that “the function of this center Rather than considering lan- structures are moveable, temporal was not only to orient, balance, guage as a whole that carries a and conditional to historical events and organize the structure –one main and central significance, de- that work in terms of change and cannot in conceive of an un- construction points out that there differentiation. organized structure- but above all is no meaning but many. Bressler to make sure that the organizing explains that Deconstruction has been associ- principle of the structure would ated to a poststructuralist trend. As limit what we might call the free- [t]here is no such point of a , post- play of the structure” (1993: 224). reference, for there is no ulti- constantly questions In a great sense, it is to say, that the mate truth or inherently uni- all kind of traditional conceptions signified losses its unquestionable fying element in the universe about any human production and power in order to accept that there and thus no ultimate reality Revista Comunicación. Volumen 17, año 29, No. 1, Enero-Julio, 2008 (pp. 29-41) 35

[…], all that is left is differ- give many different interpretations with others in a kind of a self-suf- ence. […] Reality becomes to what they listen and/or read. In ficient “inner world”; this is what a human construct that is other words, each person devel- Derrida calls the logocentric view. shaped by each individual’s ops a kind of personalized decon- In Bressler’s words, logocentricism dominant social group. There structive interpretation of the con- is “[t]he belief that there is an ulti- is no center and no one ob- ventional signification assigned to mate reality or center of truth that jective reality, but as many words. In a first instance, this is a can serve as the basis for all our as there are people. way to oppose the static transcen- and actions” (1999: 124). Each person’s interpretation of dental signified of Western phi- presupposes that ex- reality is necessarily different. losophy. istence is a matter of being present. (1999: 119) Evidently, can At this point, the Western meta- be considered as the “ The obvious appeal of this view physical assumption of centers of presence,” the obsession of the emphasizes on the empowerment is subverted by a deconstructive . According to of the speaker, listener, reader and/ view that wants to demonstrate this view, something exists if –and or writer as well as the recogni- the instability upon which any only if- its presence can be proved tion of the influences social and concept is grounded. Western in terms of science. cultural backgrounds play in dis- thinking is based on the belief that course. Individuals are allowed to people establish their relationships 36 Deconstruction and figurative language: An analysis of the way language works

Some of the main repercussions where the structural organization constituted with reference to of logecentric views deal with of opposites is disrupted. This also the in it of the other ele- the construction of hierarchies. implies a deconstruction of the ments of the sequence or sys- states that metaphysical premise of presence. tem. This linkage, this weaving, As Jonathan Culler remarks, is the text, which is produced [e]ach of these , all only through the transforma- of which involve a notion of [h]ere the issue has been tion of another text. Nothing, presence, has figured in philo- the hierarchical opposition either in the elements or in the sophical attempts to describe presence/absence. A decon- system, is anywhere simply what is fundamental and has struction would involve the present or absent. There are been treated as a centering, demonstration that for pres- only, everywhere, differences grouping force or principle. ence to function as it is said and traces of traces. (in Culler In oppositions such as mean- to, it must have the qualities 1989: 99) ing/form, soul/body, intuition/ that supposedly belong to its expression, literal/metaphori- opposite, absence. Thus, in- In other words, by differing, cal, nature/empirical, serious/ stead of defining absence in things become themselves and nonserious, the superior term terms of presence, as its nega- not other things instead. When be- belongs to the logos and the tion, we can treat “presence” coming a different thing, absence higher presence; the inferior as the effect of a generalized is necessary to create meaning. term marks a fall. Logocentrism absence or, […] of difference. Therefore, differences precede the thus assumes the priority of (1989: 95) location of meaning by undertak- the first term and conceives ing a process of displacement. the second in relation to it, as Therefore, meaning depends This movable act happens because a complication, a negation, a on absence and opposites. These no one can completely master the manifestation, or a disruption arbitrary but referential supple- in which people interact; of the first. (1989: 93) mentations (instable relationships “to codify context can always be carried out among the elements grafted onto the context it sought Opposites, then, are manifesta- of binary oppositions), no longer to describe, yielding a new con- tions of pre-established relations of delimit meaning to a single and text which escapes the previous power. In other words, opposites unique significance. Definitive formulation. Attempts to describe constitute ladders held to organize meaning cannot exist because sup- the limits always make possible a the world through language. Such plementations are never the same. displacement of those limits […].” hierarchical relationships are what They depend on the way people (Culler 1989: 124) deconstruction tries to revert. Even interact, on their contexts, cul- though deconstruction accepts tural backgrounds and their moral FIGURATIVE LANGUAGE: that hierarchal binary oppositions codes because it is impossible to A DECONSTRUCTIVE VIEW exist, it questions the superior- think of human –and their OF LANGUAGE AND THE ity assigned to privileged concep- activities- as something without WORLD tions. Deconstruction assumes that diversity. As Derrida explains, meaning is a provisional construct Deconstruction has transcended involved in a dynamic process of the play of differences in- the empirical speculation to be changes and differences. volves syntheses and referrals able to develop more accurately that prevent there from being theoretical perspectives about the While structuralism treats binary at any moment or in any way way(s) meaning is conveyed in oppositions as stable constructs, a simple element that is pres- very complex uses of language. deconstruction uses them to show ent in and of itself and refers It can help to understand and ex- the lack of stability they have. In only to itself. Whether in writ- plain the way language works as this sense, deconstruction states ten or in spoken discourse, no well as the way people express that differences precede the loca- element can function as a sign their ideas, , attitudes and tion of meaning in an act of dis- without relating to another inquiries about their surroundings. placement. When speaking, listen- element which itself is not In this sense, the use of figurative ing, reading and , there is simply present. This linkage language constitutes a clear exam- a constant movement that destroys means that each “element” ple to illustrate the deconstructive and recreates form and meaning – or - is Revista Comunicación. Volumen 17, año 29, No. 1, Enero-Julio, 2008 (pp. 29-41) 37

processes in which individuals are ers- works deconstructively to meaning-relationships in discours- involved when using language. re-create meaning when writing es is to consider the indeterminacy a poem, a play, a story, or when in which repeatability provokes Whenever a person describes taking place in a , meaning through the distortion of something by terms of another; speech, and/or lecture. This is to conventional conceptualizations. that is, comparing it with some- say people perceive the world as if To clarify such position, a more thing else, figurative language it were a metaphorical expression. detailed analysis of figurative lan- is employed. At this point, liter- So language becomes a metaphor- guage is needed. ary figures –by nature- destroy ical means rather than a system to conventional linguistic systems. refer to the world. a) The case of Metaphors and Every figurative expression - de Similes constructs itself to go beyond the Using figurative language de- literal meaning of words in order pends on people’s backgrounds When analyzing the deconstruc- to provide new effects or insights because it is necessary to share tive nature of figurative language, of an idea, feeling or a . As internal cognitive, affective and metaphors become clear points of deconstruction proposes, the use social frameworks to interpret the reference. They are implied analo- and constant re-creation of figu- world. Social and cultural environ- gies that identify one with rative language is a never ending ments are made up of another and ascribe to the first process of re-stating meaning out that create memories of all the pos- one more qualities or characteris- of conventions. This way of saying sible meanings that might be avail- tics of the second referential ele- something and meaning another is able to apply to words according ment. They constitute a symbolic, possible because words in literal to particular contexts. This set of semantic and pragmatic “substitu- expressions connote what they memories will give prominence to tion” –a kind of displacement in mean according to a the most common or literal mean- terms of deconstruction- of con- definition, while words of every- ing, but also suggests that individu- cepts or things. A metaphor exists day usage –as it happens in figu- als share a background that makes in the way its conventional mean- rative speech- express additional possible the condition of iterability ing is absent. For instance, in the layers of meaning to connotations. proposed by Derrida. expression his life is an enormous Thus, the inherent flexibility of lan- desert, a metaphorical is guage as a deconstructive act per- When using figurative language, made between two elements –life mits many possible meanings for individuals can trace repetitions and desert- essentially and con- the apparent unified literal ones. among the elements involved in a ceptually different. Then, mean- figurative expression but attribut- ing is conveyed through différance Deconstruction argues that sig- ing different meanings to each ele- rather than by transcendental sig- nifications are never present but ment. In this process, the condition nified. absent as it happens in figurative of repeatability belongs to every language. One cannot focus on figurative form. It is this condition Displacement also occurs when the conventional meaning to de- what destroys the logocentric ideal using similes. People can relate figurative language; instead, of the self-presence concept; and one thing to another by associating people destroy such conventions at the same time, it shows some the characteristics or conditions to convey meaning. To put it in of the possible combinations of that are not ascribed in conven- other words, the “essence” of what meaning-relationships any individ- tional ways. In the case of similes, is intended to be said through any ual can make. As Jonathan Culler people use them to make com- literary figure is outside its system- declares “[e]xploring the iterabil- parisons by using the expressions ic structure. There is no possible ity of language, its ability to func- like, as and such as to associate meaning that the signifier can con- tion in new contexts with the new the characteristics and essences of fer to its apparent equivalent signi- force, a treatise on textual grafting one thing to describe another. fied. would attempt to classify various ways of inserting one discourse in b) Personifications Any form of figurative language another or intervening in the dis- –metaphors, personifications, par- From a structuralist perspective, course one is interpreting” (1989: a personification is the act of rep- adoxes, similes, synecdoches, an- 135). This is what happens when titheses, hyperboles, metonymies, resenting an idea, thing or being developing figurative speech. To as having human characteristics or allegories and among oth- explore the possible insertions of 38 Deconstruction and figurative language: An analysis of the way language works

attributions. Meaning is conveyed nature and conception of friend- ous, it is related to the condition by establishing conventional co- ship –such as behavior, certain of threat, being able to menace relations among the elements in- values and social interaction- are stability. However, this structural volved in a personification. On the consciously or unconsciously de- analysis only justifies the percep- other hand, deconstruction would centering the human superiority in tion of contradiction from which argue that assigning the qualities order to expand the conditions of the concept of paradoxes have be- “of” a person to a non human enti- friendliness and knocking to other ing coined and assumed. The ap- ty; e.g. animal, object, or species or things. The appropria- parent contradiction of the words idea generates a clear disruption of tion of the “human” condition is little girl against powerful and dan- hierarchies where the human cen- an act of subversion against the gerous juxtaposes their semantic tralized vision of the world mani- conventional systems developed connotations to make possible the fests the impossible exclusivity of by the Western thinking. In a per- understanding of the . the so called “human” condition. sonification, what is considered Then, there is a de-centralization exclusively human like loses such In a paradox as well as in an an- of the human position in the world. state to become a characteristic of tithesis tension is developed; a key In this sense, a personification is a the non-human. element deconstruction considers kind of metaphorical expression in the generation of meaning. Then, that deconstructs the logocentric c) Paradoxes and Antitheses what seems to be a mismatched in characteristics assigned specifi- meaning becomes the source of cally –and as a unique aspect of- Paradoxes and antitheses are significance demonstrating that to human beings to displace the particularly associated to a cru- meaning is not created structurally hierarchical position people have cial phenomenon developed by but by deconstructing the struc- assumed over other species and deconstructionists: contradiction. ture. Paradoxes and antitheses use things. At first, these literary figures seem opposites to mean something else to contradict themselves as if they than the mere antagonism stated. When people use expressions were referring to something illogi- At this point, meaning is absent such as I have a friendly dog or cal. However, that contradiction from the structure. the sunset knocks insistently my is only an illusion caused by the door, the of the structure Western metaphysical view of the d) Synecdoches cannot provide a significant norm world. That is to say, that the sup- because words mean far from their posedly contradictory point devel- According to X.J. Kennedy and conventional connotations and oped in a paradox and in an an- Dona Gioia, a synecdoche is de- . It is the reversal of tithesis relies on the idea of static fined as“a part for the whole. This the meaningful structures of the binary oppositions. is a way of perceiving and thinking sentence what re-creates mean- as well as speaking, in its common- ing. The –friendly- and Paradoxes and antithesis de- est form, it singles out some part the –knock- which are words stroy the static and unidirectional of a thing as important enough to conventionally attributed only to conception of structuralist binary stand for the whole thing” (2002: human beings, re-configures the oppositions. Instead of the “non- 47). Using a part of something to world order and the human po- sense” construction, a contradic- stand for the whole thing creates sition in that space. In this case, tion becomes an important ele- a decentralization of the transcen- the elements associated to the ment to create meaning. To get dental signifier and signified. The the meaning(s) of the statement a inferior becomes the privileged. little girl is powerful and danger- Contrarily to the hierarchal ar- ous requires a deconstruction of rangement of things in which the the words girl, little, powerful and world has been traditionally orga- dangerous. By convention, the nized, synecdoches cause a chaos word girl refers to a female whose of the structure where transcen- age is not fully grown. Little can dental signifiers cannot provide mean weak or small in size while the source of meaning. In fact, a the word powerful refers to the synecdoche also tears down hege- capability and ability of having monies by reversing the the control of a thing or someone. of the parts that compose them. In the case of the word danger- This is what occurs when using Revista Comunicación. Volumen 17, año 29, No. 1, Enero-Julio, 2008 (pp. 29-41) 39

the expression he is a brain. The effect could represent an impos- to use language in metonymical human body as well as its po- sible act, the “lies or irrationali- ways. According to Mark Jarman, tentiality is reduced to one of its ties” they express are indeed the metonymy is “a constitutive parts: the brain. In this manifestations of meaning. Instead which is characterized by the synecdoche, meaning does not of having language working under substitution of a term naming an rely on the wholeness that consti- conventional parameters, hyper- object closely associated with the tutes an element but on a part of boles force individuals to decode word in mind for the word itself” it. What becomes more important –decenter- those conventional (2006). When people say things is the part instead of the complete structures of significance to con- like “she is the big name of the composition to which that part vey meaning. company”, the big name is belongs. In other words, the part used to stand for greater concept –in this case the brain- does not Hierarchical structures are again or group than the one it refers in become into something because subverted. The institutionalized synchronic terms. it is an element of a complete or- structures of signification are used ganized system but because it has as binary oppositions permitting g) Idioms and allegories the capacity to stand by itself for “the impossible” –in convention- the whole system. al terms- to become reality. As Idioms and allegories are com- Jacques Derrida states posed by a group of words, whose The process of signification ac- signification considered as a whole, tivated in a synecdoche implies a What a deconstructionist differs from the conventional mean- re-construction of a world that is point of view tries to demon- ings of each word thought in isola- primarily affected by the particular strate is that since conven- tion. As a deconstructionist could contexts and interactions among tions, the and the argue, no meaning is conceived in individuals. Therefore, the appar- consensus are stabilizations a structure but in a socio-cultural ent uniformity and uniqueness …, stabilizations are essential- environment. In the case of idioms of the signifiers and signifies are ly unstable and chaotic. Then, and allegories, sharing a cogni- destroyed to express –out of con- it becomes necessary to sta- tive, semantic, pragmatic, and ventions- the way people inter- bilize because stabilizations cultural background is imperative pret their realities and world; the are not neutral. Due to there to understand their significance. way language works. The process is instability, stabilization be- In other words, “meaning is con- of reinterpreting parts and whole comes necessary. Even when text-bound, but context is bound- systems constitutes a deconstruc- chaos and instability are es- less” (Culler, 1989: 123). That is tionist act of displacement that sential, they are also the worst why, understanding the expression challenges the proposed stability people have to face with the “money talks in every business” of conventions in the structural or- provisional laws, conventions, –an idiom composed by a personi- ganization and operability of lan- rules, politics and hegemo- fication- requires that individuals guage. nies. At the same time, chaos go far from literal interpretations. and instability constitute a Money is not an animate human e) Hyperboles possibility of change, a possi- subject; therefore, money does not bility to de-stabilize. Author’s have the required essence of life to In the case of hyperboles, they translation (1998: 162-163) be able to perform the mentioned refer to an over emphasis of an as- action –talking-. People can im- pect of something. In other words, By nature, hyperboles de-stabi- mediately understand that a literal hyperboles are exaggerations in lize the pre-established systems of interpretation is worthless. which the excessive expansion of signification. This process of de- a meaningful aspect is what per- stabilization is what makes pos- The same process of significa- mits the creation of significance. sible meaning, and not the con- tion and interpretation operates For instance, the hyperboles “we vention. when using allegories. Both idi- have talked about it a thousand oms and allegories are especially times, I had a day of 48 hours, I f) Metonymy contextual productions that gener- could eat an elephant” are com- ate specific associations of mean- posed by deliberate overstate- Stating that “someone drunk the ing –in the case of idioms- and that ments not intended to be assumed whole bottle”; even though, the disrupt the location of space and literally. Even when the dramatic bottle is still materially present is time –in the case of allegories-. 40 Deconstruction and figurative language: An analysis of the way language works

Again, there is a deconstruction of ple understand and use figurative meaning” plays any privileged role the Western metaphysical think- language represent a clear proof because it is not an essential part ing. that deconstruction is necessary in the construction of meaning but to conceive the world. To mean a referential construct to decenter CONCLUSIONS something, individuals certainly its hierarchical significance. need a platform of signification, Linguistic studies have been trig- but such situation does not mean Finally, it has been very com- gered by different interests about that stability is needed to convey mon to characterize literal as the the constitution, function, evolu- meaning. Instead, the chaos of the antonym of figurative as if the two tion and use of language. That structure is what allows meaning concepts were part of a kind of bi- is why disciplines like grammar, to be. nary static opposition. However, neogrammar, syntax, semantics, deconstruction proposes binary semiotics, phonology, phonet- Any figurative form is –in itself- oppositions as movable, diffusive ics and others have been used to a deconstruction of the Western and unstable relations. Rather than approach language from multiple conception of truth and reality. denoting polarized centers of sig- perspectives. However, they all Despite the controversies decon- nificance, binary oppositions be- have assumed that the nature of struction has provoked among come processes of re-configuring language is structurally articulated linguists, and literary meaning. Figurative language is in an organic form; that meanings critics, every figurative expression an example of such complex re- are coined into conventions and demonstrates that the process of construction because the meaning conventions are logocentric. The is determined –in goes beyond their unified and es- main theory in charge of articu- many cases- by absence, chaos, sential convention. This situation lating such ideas was structural- indeterminacy, displacement and makes possible the recognition of ism. Even nowadays, the linguistic iterability. The use of similes, diversity and multiple interpreta- field is strongly influenced by the metaphors, synecdoches, personi- tions in a logocentric linguistic Saussurean linguistic view about fications, antitheses, paradoxes, world. When people start to de- meaning-making processes. hyperboles, metonymies, allego- code –deconstruct- the incoming ries, idioms among others, consti- messages of figurative language, In this sense, deconstruction of- tutes one of the clearest examples meaning begins to rely on some- fers a different perspective about where individuals deconstructs thing absent, something that is the way language works and mean- the conventional world to mean not literal. But it does not mean ing is conveyed because it denies something. This deconstructionist that not literal refers to the hierarchical linear process tra- process re-configures people’s po- becoming antonymous. Instead, ditionally grounded in language. sition in the world as well as the binary operations constitute rela- Deconstruction is certainly based structural Western relations of sig- tions of supplementations. on a subversive philosophical ap- nificance. As deconstruction - pro proach that provides a very differ- poses, figurative language displac- Even though, the process of in- ent conception of the world from es the traditional locus of meaning terpretation and communication that one developed by the struc- that traditionally characterizes the takes place in reference to a sys- turalist perspective. Even though essences of being and objects. tem, this system is not necessarily some authors question the validity a unique and stable organization and reliability of deconstructionist Therefore, every figurative form of the structure because it is not its analysis, the nature and use of fig- embodies a descontructive act systematic form what shapes and urative speech evidence that there where “what gets called literal conveys meaning but the displace- is more than conventional and or- meaning is only a plausible default ment of the convention. Meaning, ganic relations when referring to in minimally specified contexts” then, destroys the logocentric meaning-making processes. (Fauconnier and Turner 2002: 69). ideal of the self-presence concept To put it in other words, the notion demonstrating the different pos- Figurative language shows that of the literal meaning is destroyed. sibilities of meaning-relationships meaning is created by the destruc- Instead, there is a play of binary a person can recreate out of the tion of conventional connotations oppositions where the absence standardized linguistic processes. (structures). In doing so, language of the literal meaning permits the Referring to something by means becomes more than a system struc- meaning-making process to take of another creates a gap that can turally organized. The ways peo- place. Then, the idea of “literal be only de-coded by the individu- Revista Comunicación. Volumen 17, año 29, No. 1, Enero-Julio, 2008 (pp. 29-41) 41

als who shared local backgrounds University of New York Press, p. of references, interactions and 223-242 interpretations because substitu- tion –displacement- is created in a Derrida, Jacques. 1998. “Notas sobre Deconstrucción y Pragmatismo”, context where the referred object from Deconstrucción y Pragma- is absent. At this outstanding point, tismo.Chantal Mouffe (Copilador). context acquires a special role. New York: PAIDÓS, p. 162-163. Readers, listeners, speakers and writers are likely to create mean- Eagleton, Terry. 1983. : ing from what they read, hear and An Introduction. Great Britain: Uni- say if they share a socio-cultural versity of Minnesota Press. context. Aspects like social activi- Fauconnier and Turner. 2002. The ties, the organization of commu- Way We Think: Conceptual Blend- nities as well as the role of insti- ing and the Mind’s Hidden Com- tutions shape rituals, traditions, plexities. New York: Basic Books. values, worldviews, moral codes, behaviors -and so on- into back- Jarman, Mark. Imagery and Figura- grounds of knowledge. People tive Language. (http://www.kstate. need to identify themselves with edu/english/nelp.f00/imagery_and_ that context because it functions as fig_lang.html). Accessed on June 17th, 2006. a decodifying-agent of their prac- tices. Figurative language is, then, Kennedy, X.J. and Gona, Gioia. a means to express the deconfica- (Editors). (2002). An Introduction to tion of the socio-cultural contexts Poetry. New York: Logman. individuals shared. That is why definitive meaning cannot be pos- Leroy, Maurice. 1976. Las Grandes sible due to there are no definitive Corrientes de la Lingüística. interpretations of contexts. Segunda Edición. México D.F.: Fondo Cultura Económica México.

WORKS CITED Salvat (Editors). 1973. Revolución en Agüero, Arturo. 1977. Origen y la Lingüística. Barcelona: Salvat. Desarrollo de la Lingüística. San Yule, George. 1996. The Study of José: Universidad de Costa Rica. Language. Second Edition. New Bressler, Charles E. 1999. Literary York: Cambridge. Criticism: An Introduction to Theory and Practice. Second Edition. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Bybee, Joan. 2001. Phonology and use of Language. New York: Cam- bridge.

Culler, Jonathan. 1989. “Introduc- tion,” “Writing and Logocentri- cism”, “Meaning and Iterability”, from Deconstruction. Ithca: Cornel University Press.

Derrida, Jacques. 1993. “Structure, Sign, and Play in the Discourse of Human ”, A Post-modern Reader. Natoli, Joseph and Hutch- eon, Linda (Editors). New York: State