INTRODUCTION

French structuralism as a theoretical framework does not have a single founder, but
rather emerged as a result of contributions from various scholars across different
disciplines. However, two key figures who are often credited with laying the groundwork
for French structuralism are Ferdinand de Saussure and Claude Lévi-Strauss.

A BRIEF HISTORY OF FERDINAND DE SAUSSURE

Ferdinand de Saussure, a Swiss linguist, is widely regarded as one of the founding

figures of structuralism, a theoretical framework that emerged in various fields including
linguistics, anthropology, and literary theory during the 20th century. Saussure's
contributions to linguistics laid the groundwork for structuralism by introducing key
concepts and methods that later became central to structuralist thought.

Ferdinand de Saussure was born in Geneva, Switzerland, in 1857. He came from a

family of scholars and intellectuals. He studied classical languages, philosophy, and
theology at the University of Geneva and later pursued further studies in Paris, where
he was exposed to the intellectual currents of the time.

Saussure's most influential work is his "Course in General Linguistics" (published

posthumously in 1916), which is based on his lectures at the University of Geneva in the
early 20th century. In this work, he introduced groundbreaking ideas about language
structure and function that revolutionized the field of linguistics.

Saussure's ideas had a profound influence on structuralism, a theoretical framework

that emerged in the mid-20th century. Structuralists in various fields adopted Saussure's
emphasis on analyzing underlying structures and systems rather than individual
elements. Structuralism became a dominant intellectual paradigm in fields such as
anthropology (Claude Lévi-Strauss), literary theory (Roland Barthes), and psychology
(Jacques Lacan).

However, Saussure's legacy extends beyond structuralism to influence later

developments in linguistics, semiotics, and cultural studies. His ideas continue to be
studied and debated by scholars across disciplines, and his "Course in General
Linguistics" remains a foundational text in the study of language and communication.

WHAT IS FRENCH STRUCTURALISM?

Structuralism, as the term suggests, is concerned with structures and more particularly
with examining the general laws by which they work.

It brackets off the actual content of a story and concentrates entirely on the form.

French Structuralism flourished in the 1960s as an attempt to apply to literature the

methods and insight of the founder of modern structural linguistics, Fernard De
Saussure.

Saussure viewed language as a system of “signs” which can be studied “synchronically”

that is to say, it can be studied as a complete system at a given point in time rather than
“diachronically” in its historical development.

The structuralist emphasis on the “constructedness” of human meaning represented a

major advance. Meaning was neither a private experience nor divinely ordained
occurrence. It was a product of a certain shared system of signification.

The essence of Structuralism is the belief that “things cannot be understood in isolation,
they have to be seen in the context of larger structures they are part of”, The contexts of
larger structures do not exist by themselves, but are formed by our way of perceiving
the world.

In structuralist criticism, consequently, there is a constant movement away from the

interpretation of the individual literary work towards understanding the larger structures
which contain them. For example, the structuralist analysis of Donne‘s poem Good
Morrow demands more focus on the relevant genre (alba or dawn song), the concept of
courtly love, etc., rather than on the close reading of the formal elements of the text.

For Saussure, according to Bello-Kano (2002), the sign is arbitrary. Therefore, the
relation between the signifier and the signified is only a matter of convention. This
distinction, for Saussure, does not refer to a name or a thing but to that between word
image and the concept, which can only be separable at the analytical level. To buttress
his argument further, Saussure (1974:116) remarked, “if words stood for pre-existing
entities they would all have exact equivalents in meaning from one language to the next,
but all this is not true”.

Furthermore, Structuralist literary theory emphasizes the ways in which literary works
are structured and organized. Structuralists analyze the underlying structures and
patterns of literary texts, including plot, character, symbolism, and imagery. They argue
that these structures and patterns reveal deeper meanings and insights into the human
experience.
Structuralist literary critics analyze a literary text as a system of signifiers that create
meaning. They focus on the relationships between different elements within the text,
such as plot, character, and setting. Structuralist literary analysis often involves
identifying patterns and structures within the text and exploring their significance.

APPLICATION OF STRUCTURALISM LITERARY THEORY

Structuralist literary analysis can be applied to a wide range of literary texts. For
example, in William Shakespeare's play Hamlet, a structuralist analysis might focus on
the relationships between the characters and the themes of revenge and madness.

In James Joyce's novel Ulysses, a structuralist analysis might focus on the different
narrative structures that are used throughout the book.

Also, Jacques Lacan applied structuralist ideas to the analysis of “Hamlet” in his essay
“The Uncanny”. Lacan argued that the play's exploration of identity, madness, and the
Oedipus complex reflects underlying structures of the human psyche.

"The Waste Land" by T.S. Eliot: In his book "The Structuralist View of Theories of
Fiction," Robert Scholes analyzed Eliot's poem as a complex system of interrelated
motifs and images. He argued that the poem reflects underlying structures of cultural
and historical meaning.

These examples demonstrate the versatility and applicability of structuralist literary

theory in the analysis of diverse literary works. By analyzing the underlying structures of
literary texts, structuralist theory offers a rich understanding of the significance of
literature.

THE BASIC TENET OF STRUCTURALISM LITERARY THEORY USING THE

LITERARY TEXT “ROMEO AND JULIET” BY WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE

"Romeo and Juliet" is a tragic play written by William Shakespeare around 1595. It tells
the story of two young lovers, Romeo Montague and Juliet Capulet, who belong to
feuding families in Renaissance Verona. Despite the enmity between their families,
Romeo and Juliet fall deeply in love and secretly marry. However, their happiness is
short-lived as a series of misunderstandings, duels, and tragic events lead to their
untimely deaths. The play explores themes of love, fate, familial conflict, and the
consequences of impulsive actions. "Romeo and Juliet" remains one of Shakespeare's
most enduring and widely performed works, celebrated for its lyrical language, complex
characters, and poignant portrayal of young love.

1.Language as a System

Structuralism views language as a structured system of signs where meaning arises

from the relationships between signifiers (words or symbols) and signifieds (concepts or
ideas). In "Romeo and Juliet," we can analyze how Shakespeare employs language to
convey meaning through dialogue, imagery, and symbolism. For example, the recurring
motif of light and darkness symbolizes the themes of love and conflict in the play.

2. Arbitrariness of the Sign:

According to structuralist theory, the connection between the signifier and the signified
is arbitrary, meaning there is no inherent relationship between the word or symbol and
the concept it represents. In "Romeo and Juliet," Shakespeare's use of language
demonstrates this arbitrariness, as words and phrases evoke different meanings
depending on their context and interpretation by the characters and audience.

3. Binary Oppositions:

Structuralism emphasizes the role of binary oppositions in shaping meaning. In "Romeo

and Juliet," we can identify several binary oppositions, such as love/hate, light/darkness,
life/death, and youth/age. These oppositions structure the conflict and themes of the
play, highlighting the tensions between the Capulet and Montague families, as well as
the tragic consequences of their feud.

4. Structural Analysis:

Structuralism seeks to uncover the underlying structures, patterns, and systems of

meaning within a text. In "Romeo and Juliet," structural analysis involves examining the
narrative structure, character relationships, and thematic motifs. For instance, we can
analyze the play's five-act structure, the use of foreshadowing, and the recurring motifs
of fate and fortune.

5. Synchronic Analysis:

Structuralism focuses on studying cultural phenomena synchronically, meaning it

examines them as they exist at a specific moment in time, rather than tracing their
historical development. In "Romeo and Juliet," a synchronic analysis would involve
analyzing the play as a static text, considering how its formal structures and linguistic
patterns generate meaning within the context of Elizabethan society and literary
conventions.

By applying the basic tenets of structuralism to "Romeo and Juliet," we can gain insight
into the play's underlying structures, patterns, and systems of meaning, revealing how
language, symbolism, and narrative devices contribute to its overall significance and
interpretation.

THE WEAKNESSES OF STRUCTURALISM LITERARY THEORY USING ROBERT

FROST’S THE ROAD NOT TAKEN

Robert Frost's "The Road Not Taken" is a celebrated poem that has been analyzed and
interpreted in various ways. One such approach is through the lens of French
Structuralism, a linguistic theory that emphasizes the structure of language and its
underlying system.

"The Road Not Taken" is a poem that explores the theme of choice and the impact of
decisions on one's life. The speaker reflects on a moment in the past when they faced a
fork in the road and had to choose between two paths. The poem is often interpreted as
a metaphor for the choices we make in life and the consequences that follow.

From a French Structuralist perspective, "The Road Not Taken" can be analyzed in
terms of its linguistic structure. The poem consists of four stanzas, each with five lines.
The rhyme scheme is ABAAB, with the first, third, and fourth lines rhyming, and the
second and fifth lines rhyming. This structure creates a sense of rhythm and symmetry,
which contributes to the overall aesthetic appeal of the poem.

The poem also contains several linguistic elements that can be analyzed through the
lens of Saussurean linguistics. For example, the title "The Road Not Taken" can be
seen as a sign, with "road" being the signifier and "not taken" being the signified. This
highlights the theme of choice and the idea that the speaker took a path that was
different from the one they did not choose.

WEAKNESSES OF STRUCTURALISM FROM SAUSSURE’S PERSPECTIVE

Arbitrariness of the Sign:

One of the key concepts in Saussurean linguistics is the arbitrariness of the sign, which
means that there is no inherent connection between the signifier and the signified. In the
case of "The Road Not Taken," the title suggests a sense of regret or longing for the
path not chosen, which may not accurately reflect the speaker's feelings. The title "The
Road Not Taken" can be seen as a sign, with "road" being the signifier and "not taken"
being the signified. However, this interpretation may not accurately capture the
speaker's emotions or intentions. The speaker may not necessarily regret the path they
chose, and the title may not accurately reflect the complexity of their decision-making
process.

Lack of Historical Context:

Saussure emphasized the importance of the diachronic dimension of language, which

refers to its historical development. While "The Road Not Taken" can be analyzed in
terms of its synchronic structure, it does not provide insight into the historical context in
which the speaker made their choice. This limits our understanding of the poem's
deeper meaning and the speaker's motivations. The poem does not provide any
information about the speaker's background, the circumstances that led to the fork in
the road, or the consequences of their decision. Without this historical context, it is
difficult to fully understand the speaker's emotions and the significance of their choice.

Lack of Clarity in the Signified:

Saussure also emphasized the importance of the signified, which refers to the concept
or meaning that a sign represents. In "The Road Not Taken," the signified is not clearly
defined, and the poem can be interpreted in multiple ways. For example, the speaker
may be seen as regretting their decision to take the less traveled path, or they may be
seen as embracing the idea of taking the road less traveled. The lack of clarity in the
signified makes it difficult to determine the speaker's true intentions and emotions.

Limited Analysis of the Diachronic Dimension:

While "The Road Not Taken" can be analyzed in terms of its synchronic structure, it
does not provide insight into the historical development of the language or the cultural
context in which the speaker made their choice. This limits our understanding of the
poem's deeper meaning and the speaker's motivations. The poem does not provide any
information about the speaker's background, the circumstances that led to the fork in
the road, or the consequences of their decision. Without this historical context, it is
difficult to fully understand the speaker's emotions and the significance of their choice.

Ambiguity in the Signifier:

Saussure also emphasized the importance of the signifier, which refers to the form or
sound of a sign. In "The Road Not Taken," the signifier is ambiguous, and the poem can
be interpreted in multiple ways. For example, the phrase "the road not taken" can be
seen as referring to the path that the speaker did not choose, or it can be seen as
referring to the path that the speaker did choose. The ambiguity in the signifier makes it
difficult to determine the speaker's true intentions and emotions.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, structuralism is a theoretical approach that emphasizes the

interdependence of elements within a system. In literary theory, structuralism focuses
on analyzing the underlying structures that give meaning to a literary text. Although
structuralism has been criticized for its formalism and its tendency to ignore historical
and cultural context, it has had a significant impact on literary theory and criticism.
Structuralism has provided a new way of understanding the underlying structures of
literary texts and has challenged traditional approaches to literary analysis.

REFERENCES

Blamires, H.(1991). A History of Literary Criticism, London: Macmillan.

Charles Swann & Raymond William.(1996). Literary Theory: Blackwells Publishers Ltd.

Hawkes, T. (1977). Structuralism and Semiotics, London: Methuen.

Leitch, Vincent B. The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism. W. W. Norton &
Company, 2010.

Eagleton, Terry. Literary Theory: An Introduction. University of Minnesota Press, 2008.

Cuddon, J. A. A Dictionary of Literary Terms and Literary Theory. Wiley-Blackwell,

2013.

Shakespeare, William. Romeo and Juliet. Edited by Brian Gibbons, Oxford University
Press, 2000.

Tyson, Lois. Critical Theory Today: A User-Friendly Guide. Routledge, 2014.