Scribd
Upload
103 views

Derrida by Dr. S. Singh UG 2nd Sem

Derrida's seminal work "Structure, Sign and Play in the Discourse of Human Sciences" introduced the concept of post-structuralism. It argues that the idea of a central structure or meaning is flawed, as sign systems are inherently unstable and open to interpretation. Derrida asserts that attempts to decentre traditional concepts of truth and meaning still rely on the very logics they seek to dismantle. He proposes moving towards an "interpretation of interpretation" that embraces free play and multiplicity over rigid structures or origins of meaning.

Uploaded by

Karmu Potato
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
103 views

Derrida by Dr. S. Singh UG 2nd Sem

Derrida's seminal work "Structure, Sign and Play in the Discourse of Human Sciences" introduced the concept of post-structuralism. It argues that the idea of a central structure or meaning is flawed, as sign systems are inherently unstable and open to interpretation. Derrida asserts that attempts to decentre traditional concepts of truth and meaning still rely on the very logics they seek to dismantle. He proposes moving towards an "interpretation of interpretation" that embraces free play and multiplicity over rigid structures or origins of meaning.

Uploaded by

Karmu Potato
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

[1]

Structure, Sign and Play in the Discourse of Human Sciences


by Jacques Derrida
(English, U.G. 2nd Semester)

Q. Bring out the central idea of Jacques Derrida’s Structure, Sign and Play in
the Discourse of Human Sciences?

Ans.: Jacques Derrida first read his paper “Structure, Sign and Play in the Discourse of
Human Sciences (1966)” at the John Hopkins International Colloquium on “The Language of
Criticism and the Sciences of Man” in October 1966 articulating for the first time a post
structuralist theoretical paradigm. The lecture cum essay, Structure, Sign and Play in the
Discourse of Human Sciences introduced Jacques Derrida to the United States as well as to the
English-speaking world. It throws a question on the idea of „structure‟ in structuralism, and
absolute truths outside a system of signs. This lecture was described by Richard Macksey and
Eugenio Donata to be “the first time in the United States when structuralism had been thought of
as an interdisciplinary phenomenon.”

Derrida begins the essay by referring to „an event‟ which has „perhaps‟ occurred in the
history of the concept of structure, that is also a „redoubling‟. The event which the essay
documents is that of a definitive epistemological break with structuralist thought, of the ushering
in of post-structuralism as a movement critically engaging with structuralism and also with
traditional humanism and empiricism. It turns the logic of structuralism against itself insisting
that the“structurality of structure” itself had been repressed in structuralism.The notion of
structure, even in structuralist theory has always presupposed a centre of meaning of sorts.
Derrida terms this desire for a centre as „logocentrism‟. Derrida decenters this idea of structure
and sign system. Derrida argues that the centre cannot be substituted: “It is the point at which
substitution of contents, elements and terms is no longer possible.” The history of human
sciences has thereby been a process of substitution, replacement and transformation of this centre
through which all meaning is to be sought –– God, the Idea, the World Spirit, the Renaissance
Man etc.
[2]

Derrida argues that all these attempts at „decentering‟ were however, “trapped in assort of
circle”. This is true, according to deconstructive thought, for almost all critique of Western
thought that arises from within western thought: it would inevitably be bound up with that which
it questions –––“We have no language-no syntax and no lexicon-which is alien to this history;
we cannot utter a single destructive proposition which has not already slipped into the form, the
logic, and the implicit postulations of precisely what it seeks to contest.” In support of this
argument, Derrida takes up the example of Saussure‟s description of sign–– the signifier and the
signified. The part of the sign Saussure calls the concept or meaning (mental
impression/association of the „thing‟) he named, „signified‟. The idea of what „Google‟ is, for
example, is signified. The part he calls the „sound-image‟ (the mental „linguistic sign‟ given to
the „thing‟) he named the „signifier‟ ––– this is the sound Google‟s logo creates in our minds.

Derrida next considers the theme of decentering with respect to French structuralist Claud
Levi-Strauss‟s ethnology. He therefore insists on Strauss‟s idea of a bricolage, “the necessity of
borrowing one‟s concept from the text of a heritage which is more or less coherent or ruined, it
must be said that every discourse is bricoleur.” Derrida still building on Strauss‟s work,
introduces the concept of totalization ––“Totalization is…at one time as useless, at another time
as impossible.”

Derrida concludes this seminal work which is often regarded as the post-structuralist
manifesto with the hope that we proceed towards an “interpretation of interpretation” where one
“is no longer turned towards the origin, affirms freeplay and tries to pass beyond man and
humanism”. He says that we need to borrow Nietzsche‟s idea of affirmation to stop seeing play
as limiting and negative. Nietzsche‟s pronouncement “God is dead” need not be read as a
destruction of a cohesive structure, but can be seen as a chance that opens up a possibility of
diverse plurality and multiplicity.

You might also like