CC BY
54
Section 9. Philology and linguistics
https://doi.org/10.29013/ESR-20-3.4-48-51
Koberidze Mariam, Doctor of Philological Saiencec, Professor Georgian Science of Language Gori State Teaching University, Georgia E-mail: maikoberidze@gmail.com
GENERAL-LINGUISTIC ASSESSMENT OF THE FERDINAND DE SAUSSURE'S CONCEPTION IN THE GEORGIAN LINGUISTICS
Abstract. In the previous article there is presented the general-linguistic assessment of the Ferdinand de Saussure's conception in the Georgian Linguistics. The opinions of the famous Georgian linguists: Arnold Chikobava, Konstantine Chrelashvili, Mikheil Kurdiani, Tamaz Gamkrelidze and others are noteworthy. The research also concerns one of the actual and important questions for linguistic -studying Ferdinand de Saussure's personal letters with linguistic point of view.
Keywords: Ferdinand de Saussure, linguistics, sign, conception, speech, problems, system, Georgian.
I. Intruduction the paper, we used Ferdinand de Saussure's "Course
Ferdinand de Saussure's linguistic conception in General Linguistics" for analysis, which was trans-effected especially on development of different di- lated into Georgian by Tsisana Bibileishvili and published under the editorship of Bakar Gigineishvili in 2002. In order to evaluate Ferdinand de Saussure's general linguistic concept, it is important to study the linguistic aspects of his personal letters. For this purpose, we used the Ferdinand de Saussure'srecords from the epistolatory inheritance collected and published by Johannes Feier, a professor at the Zurich Technical High School in Switzerland, for analysis: texts, letters and documents, translated into Georgian by Venera Kavtiashvili, Nino Popiashvili and Shorena Shamanadze (2010). II. Method of research
During working on a scientific paper, we used a historical-comparative and descriptive method.For the purposes of the study, diachronic and synchronic analyses were used: dividing chronologically the re-
rections of XX century's linguistic thinking. He is justly considered as one of the founders of the contemporary linguistic, who effected on the following development of linguistic greatly. Ferdinand de Sau-ssure's linguistic opinions are paid special attention in modern Georgian linguistic. It is interesting the noteworthy opinions and scientific works expressed by famous Georgian linguistics. In particular, it is mentioned: Arnold Chikobava's, "General Linguistics" (1983); Konstantine Chrelashvili's "History of Linguistic Doctrines" (1990); Tinatin Sharashe-nidze's "Language and Speech Relationship" (1974), Mikheil Kurdiani's "Theory of Linguistic mark" (2008), Tamaz Gamkrelidze's, Zaza Kiknadze's, Inga shaduri's, Nana Shengelaia's "Theoretical Linguistics Course" (2003) and etc. While working on
search question and evaluating it in relation to the present for to get the final result.
III. Main part
Ferdinand de Saussure's entire linguistic concept is given in his work "Coursein General Linguistics". This work was preceded by his brilliant "Research about the Original System of Indo-European Language Vowels", which immediately attracted the attention of researchers. At that time, Saussure was 21 years old and its author was recognized as a prominent Indo-Europeanist. Indeed, in the mentioned work there was used a completely new method of analysis at that time. This work is important in that point, that it contains the main postulate of his theory: Language should be considered as a system where everything is interconnected and conditioned by each other.On the basis of such an approach to analytical language facts, Saussure managed not only the brilliant description of the vocal system, but also the reconstruction of vowels, which had some effect on the sound composition of the Indo-European root, and then disappeared [1, 158]. The proclamation of language as a system was a very important event in the history of linguistic thinking. The basis of his concept is three linguistic concepts: speakingability (language), language (langue) and speech (parole) [2, 14].
According to the Arnold Chikobava's opinion, the key points of Saussure's concept are created by the following issues in terms of essence of language: 1. Distinguish between the concepts of language and speech; 2. Determining the essence of linguistic sign; 3. A peculiar understanding of the relationship of synchronic and diachronic linguistics. [3, 91]. What is the language by Ferdinand de Saussure's meaning? Language is a system of signs in which there is an acoustic connection between-concept and image.Language with its nature does not have less specific character than speech, and this greatly contributes to its research. Language is a system of signsexpressing concept. Therefore it can be compared to the written language, the deaf-mute alphabet, symbolic rituals, etiquette formulas,
military signals, and so on. But language is the most important of these systems [2, 26, 27].
That thevariability of the acoustic image is an accountable phenomenon, is well illustrated by the example of the Iberian-Caucasian languages, where except so-called main cases also existed locative (prepositional) cases (even without regardto diba-sicprinciple in the main cases), where the soundimage undergoes significant transformations [5, 224]. Arnold Chikobava analyzes critically Ferdinand de Saussure's concept. What is valuable in Saussure's concept? Most important, in this regard, is the outline of the social nature oflanguage and the characterization of linguistic sign, as towards any signifiedand notany speaking individual, as well as the characterization of language as a system of signs [3, 98]. From the point of view of Ferdinand de Saussure, the synchronic aspect is more important than the diachronic one, because from the point of view of the speaking mass only this is the real and the only reality [2, 44]. The diachronic aspect is related to historical grammar. Historical research has made science about language. Therefore, it is possible to point out one fact - both aspects are important for the scientific study of language: syn-chronic and diachronic.
From Ferdinand de Saussure's concept, it is important to introduce the concept ofvalue into theoretical linguistics.The relation oflinguistic signs to other signs of the system and the relation of its signifierto the sig-nifiedjointly determine the value of this sign. The sign itself may be immutable, but it will have a different value if other signs of the system are changed, with which it creates certain relationships.According to one of the founders of modern linguistics Ferdinand de Saussure, value is a feature of a sign - to be that, what distinguishes it from another sign.Even the signs of the same events and objects in different language systems always have different values [4, 31].
According to Ferdinand de Saussure, the signified is a concept, while the signifier is asoundimage or word. Their unity represents a linguistic sign.Ac-cording to Mikheil Kurdiani's opinion, "signified is
meaning or semantics, and signifier is a morpheme, and their unity represents a linguistic sign" [5, 225]. The ability of sign to name and reflect a referent is called a nomination function i.e. a sign exists and functions on the basis of the interrelationship and mutual conditioning of nomination and communication functions" [6, 18]. According to Arnold Chikobava'sassessment, speech is always a communicative action and its discussion is necessary only from the position of the communicative act. The history of mankind does not know any case that any language had merely an expressive function, that it did not have a communicative function for a defined linguistic collective [3, 99].
Clearly, speech is going in a particular situation, and it is directed at a particular situation, which, therefore, implies an act of communication, and which is also obviously social in nature. "And this means that speech is no less social than language, because the speaker is forced to speak in a way that is understandable for the listener, that is, as it is accepted in the linguistic collective. Therefore, this controversy is irrelevant" [7; 6]. It should also be noted that T. Sharashenidze does not agree with Saussure's opinion that only language is a system (of signs). "In his view, speech is also systemic natured, because, language is the weapon and the product of speech, and at the same time speech is realization, performance, then it is unclear how speech can be devoid of systematic character, while language represents a system" [7; 6].
According to Ferdinand de Saussure's opinion, a science that studies the system of signs in the entrails of social life is permissible.It should be part of social psychology, and therefore part of general psychology. We call it "semasiology." It introduces us to what signs are and what law governs them. Linguistics is only part of this general science. The laws discovered by semasiology will be useful in linguistics [2, 27]. We think that there should be separated semasiology as a field of linguistics and as a psychology.
The study of the linguistic aspects of Ferdinand de Saussure's personal letters is also relevant and important
in terms ofrelation to the present. It is interesting to establish the linguistic characteristics and means used by the author for to achieve the influence of the addressee. Ferdinand de Saussure's personal letters present special moments of his scientific career. The addressees of the personal letters are his friends, acquaintances and the people with whom he was involved in scientific activities: Adolphe Pictet, Louis Howe, Antoine Meyer, Albert Ridinger, Leopold Gutierrez, Henri Odier, Alper Cooney, Charles Ball G. Pascol etc.
The norms of linguistic etiquette of Ferdinand de Saussure's personal letters in terms of pragmatics are interesting: the rules ofcommunicationalrelation, the use of language in the situation considering the context, shared knowledge with addressees, intonation, gesture; There is shown the chronological connection of personal letters with Ferdinand de Saussure's biography, linguistic theories, manuscripts, published works and lectures. It is also noteworthy to be discussed the main problems of linguistics of personal letters in a semasiological context. In the abovemen-tioned letter he writes Adolphe Pictet: "I am just only a disciple and I would not have dared to share my ideas with you, for a man I just know a little, if I had not been convinced that the system, I have been working on for a year, I did not consider it as an unquestionable fact" [8, 356]. Weunderstand from this letter that Ferdinand de Saussure is working on the theory of Indo-European languages. It is true that the letters of Ferdinand de Saussure do not give an exhaustive picture of the author's work, but it, as a documentary material, is one of the biographical sources. In Ferdinand de Saussure's personal letters there are revealed his views related to the research issues.
IV. Conclusion
Thus, the assessment of Ferdinand de Saussure's concept in Kartvelian linguistics has great importance for the perfect perception of the work of the great linguist. The problems posed here and search-ingthe ways to solve them are still relevant for theoretical linguistics today in terms of cultural communication and globalization in relation to the present.
References:
1. Chrelashvili K. History of Linguistic Doctrines.- Tbilisi, 1990.
2. Saussure De F. Course in General Linguistics.- Tbilisi, 2002.
3. Chikobava A. General Linguistics.- Tbilisi, 1983.
4. Gamkrelidze T., Kiknadze z., Shaduri I., Shengelaia N. Theoretical Linguistics Course.- Tbilisi, 2003.
5. Kurdiani M. Morphematic Theory of Linguistic mark: Iberian-Caucasian Linguistics, XXVI.- Tbilisi, 2008.
6. Lebanidze G. Lectures in Introduction to Linguistics and General Linguistics: Language and Culture.-Tbilisi, 1997.
7. Sharashenidze T. Language and Speech Relationship.- Tbilisi, 1974.
8. Saussure De F. Linguage and Semiology. Texts, letters and documents.- Tbilisi. 2010.
