A COMPARATIVE STUDY ON SIGNIFICATION AND SUGGESTION
Joby John
MA, B.Ed.
E-Mail:jobykeelath@gmail.com
Abstract:The academic paper entitled, “A Comparative Study on Signification and Suggestion” is an attempt to compare and
study two key terms in the philosophy of language such as Signification (Sign, Signifier and Signified) and Suggestion
(Vyanjana). These two terms are still a subject of research in modern semantics. This comparative study aims at comparing
both Eastern and Western schools of philosophy of language to come up with the similarities and individual traits of both
schools. In order to make the study more brief and accurate this academic study mainly focusing on Saussurean
understanding on sign from the Western side and Vyanjana from Sabdhabodha ( One of the source of knowledge of the Nyaya
Epistemology) from the East. Both these linguistic philosophies mainly deals with word and its meaning on the basis of
structure and context.
Key Words: Vyanjana, Sign, Signifier, Signification
Introduction
1.1. Introduction
Language is nothing but a constructed one. It does not
hold any mysterious nature within it by its nature. It is
obtained naturally, because each individual has an
innate universal neural syntax inside the brain. It is
this universal neural syntax enables a language
learner to acquire any language logically. That is the
only reason why any difficult language is acquired by
a child born in that linguistic context. A child learns
its mother tongue at the early days only because of
the linguistic atmosphere around. But philosophers
take diverse positions in the assumed expedition in
identifying the exact reason behind language
acquisition and meaning generation. Language is the
medium through which we approach any reality,
because sensation is only a source whereas language
is an active medium. It means that sensation is an
individual experience whereas language is a
contextual experience. Language is acquired,
preserved and transmitted through the meaningful
arrangement of words in context. Systematic studies
on language as stated above have begun before
Common Era. David Crystal describes the
chronological development of language and
linguistics in his epoch making work The Cambridge
Encyclopedia of Language.
Often, the observations have been subjective and
anecdotal, as people reflected on such topics as the
nature of meaning, ideals of correctness and the
origins of language. But from the earliest periods,
there has been an objective approach, with scholars
investigating aspects of grammar, vocabulary and
pronunciation in detailed and organized way. At the
end of the 18th century the subject attracted an
increasing number of specialties, so much so that it
rapidly became possible to see the emergence of a
new field of scientific research with language analysis
as it focus. This approach, first known as philology,
dealt exclusively with the historical development of
language.1
Historical awareness of the origin and development of
language is needed to explore the major tenets of
language and meaning and to describe at length the
multifarious concepts related to it.2 According David
Crystal, “A religious or philosophical awareness of
language can be found in many early civilizations; in
particular, several of the important issues of language
analysis were addressed by the grammarians and
philosophers of Ancient Greece, Rome and India.”3
1.2. Word and Meaning
The word represents the reality or meaning. A word
conveys meaning through the association of
difference. Each word of a particular language is
understood with the help of the other words available.
And the associations of the different words in
languages represent the reality or meaning. That is,
ultimate meaning is not possible without having an
Ensygloge
An International Journal for Arts and Science
www.ensygloge.com
5
ISSN: 2583-1011
Vol.:1, Issue:1; January-June, 2021
Article No.: V1N1002
Omni glottal language. Many philosophers have tried
to untie the mysterious nature of language and
meaning. The linguistic philosophy has its origin
when human beings have begun to use language
logically and systematically to express simple and
complex realities around him. The best example to
prove this statement was the ancient grammatical text
composed by Panini. David Crystal, a linguist
describes the content of Astadhyayi in The Cambridge
Encyclopedia of Language. David Crystal says:
The Astadhyayi (‘Eight books’), dealing mainly with
rules of word formation, are composed in such a
condensed style that they have required extensive
commentary and a major descriptive tradition has
since been established. The work is remarkable for its
detailed phonetic descriptions: for example, places of
articulation are clearly described, the concept of
voicing is introduced, and the influence of sounds on
each other in connected speech is recognized (the
notion of sandhi). Several concepts of modern
Linguistics derive from this tradition.4
So it is clear that every culture has its own
understanding and clarifications to the language and
linguistic philosophy. Though the modern linguistic
philosophy argues its originality, it is originally a kind
of manipulation of the ancient language philosophy.
The modern society took linguistics as a branch of
study with the lectures of the Swiss linguist Ferdinand
de Saussure (1857-1913). Actually when his
academic development is studied historically it is
clear that he has got a good Sanskrit ground in the
field of linguistic philosophy. As far as the
observations it is clear that he has introduced Sanskrit
linguistic terms in modern terms to the modern
society. He studied the basic sensible unit of the
language in terms of a combination of the sound unit
and to which it is referred to. All his lectures are
compiled by his students and published it on the title
Course in General Linguistics in the year 1916.5
According to his reach and study language is to be
studied as if a system of signs. Structuralism has got
its origin in the field of language with his linguistic
theories. He has left few hinds of a deep grammatical
structure which energizes the entire system of signs
systematically. But later it is Chomsky who has
developed that particular field under TG grammar.
The foremost pronouncement of this academic paper
is particularly based on the relation between
Signification and Suggestion. The following
paragraphs introduces the following chapters.
1.3. Chapter Summary
The second chapter entitled “Signification” discusses
the fundamental relationship between Signifier and
Signified. It also deals with how meaning can be
composed by adjoining smaller elements (Signifier
and Signified) through signification. The concluding
chapter entitled elucidates the uniqueness of the
structure of all words or sentences in generating
different levels of meaning. This chapter studies the
theory of Vyanjana in detail and asserts that there are
many similarities between Signification and
Suggestion. In this chapter the similarities and
differences are systematically analyzed.
II. SIGNIFICATION
2.1. Introduction
Ferdinand de Saussure, in the Course in General
Linguistics, describes language as a system of signs (a
word is a sign) to which we respond in a predictable
way.6 According to him, the sign is made up of a
signifier (e.g., the acoustic form of the word, the
sound) and a signified (e.g., a mental concept). These
two are combined in the mind resulting in
understanding or meaning (e.g., perceiving the sound
“cat” signals the object “cat”). The bond between the
signifier and the signified is arbitrary; any word can
be used to signify anything.7He also envisages
semiology as a science of signs. For him language is
only one of the systems studied by semiotics.
Semiotics is a key to unlock the cultural phenomena
where multifarious signs play in different forms. He
presents the model in the dyadic tradition. Here he
explains the meaningful element of a language Sign
consists of two inseparable elements; 1). Signifier and
2). Signified.
The twenty first century linguistic critics describe
signifier as the form of reference point whereas
Signifeid as the referred point. But Saussure defines
them as “Concept” and “Sound Pattern.” A linguistic
sign has only a conceptual existence. Here the
material thing outside is not taken into consideration.
According to Tanveer Ahmed Muhammadi, “The
internal system of these signs is binary. It comprises a
sound segment (signifier) and another segment,
“thought” he termed as “signified”. Signifier is
Ensygloge
An International Journal for Arts and Science
www.ensygloge.com
6
ISSN: 2583-1011
Vol.:1, Issue:1; January-June, 2021
Article No.: V1N1002
essentially a sound image than merely a sound. A
particular sound image relates to a particular
thought.”9
2.2. Functions of the elements of the sign
A sound pattern always work in the mind in
association with a perceived conceptual impression.
Therefore this sound pattern is functioning just like a
catalyst that mediates in meaning generation. Because
the sound pattern and the material thing to which it is
referred to has only an arbitrary relation. But
onomatopoeic sound patterns are different. Sign
becomes a meaningful unit only when the both
elements are given an appropriate association.10 For
Saussure, both of the said elements are purely
psychological.11
2.2.1. Signification
Within the Saussurean model, the sign is the whole
that results from the association of the signifier with
the signified.13 The signifier – signified association is
known as “Signification.”
The process of the association these internal elements
are depicted with arrows (see Figure2.2). The
horizontal broken line marking the two elements of
the sign is referred to as ‘the bar’. For example if we
take sign consisting of:
• A signifier: the word ‘Tree’;
• A signified concept: The Idea Tree and also the real
tree. From this it is very clear that both the said
elements play a vital role in the conceptualization of
an idea. It also promotes the notion that both these
elements cannot be totally meaningless and formless.
A signifier has multiple role in the realm of meaning
generation. It will not limit itself within the
boundaries of a single signified but a kind of
suggestiveness also works with it. Sometimes a chain
of signifiers are observed in the application of sign in
the linguistic gymnastic.14 Saussure makes it clear
that writing relates to speech as a signifier to signified
or as Derrida puts it, for Saussure writing is ‘a sign of
a sign’.15Most subsequent theorists who have adopted
Saussure’s model tend to refer to the form of
linguistic signs as either spoken or written (e.g.
Jakobson 1970, 455–6 and 1984b, 98).As for the
signified, Umberto Eco notes that it is somewhere
between ‘a mental image, a concept and a
psychological reality’. Thus it can be concluded
thatSaussurean followers treat the signified as a
mental impression.
2.3. Imagery of a dubious sided paper
Both the verbal and the idea are compared to two
sides of a paper by Saussure. For it is not possible to
understand or comprehend the concept of a paper
without the presence of both its sides. That means
there is an inseparable link between these sides what
makes them as if it were one. They were ‘intimately
linked’ in the mind ‘by an associative link’ – ‘each
triggers the other’16. Saussure puts foreword these
elements as interdependent units. Take the case of a
word and its meaning. A word is a phonological
meaningful unit or units. Though it is said in such a
way that a word always carries meaning, this
concerned meaning is actually an attributed one
within a context. Therefore a sign being a sound unit
as well as a mind impression could not be understood
out of a linguistic context where a signifier is referred
to its referent. Saussurean representation of the
correlation of the elements of a sign is not a mere
depiction of an arbitrary relation, but it also represents
how these elements are conjoined in producing
meaning. The inseparable association of these
elements are emphasized by using two arrows in
Saussurean diagram on meaning generation. Why I
said so is because when an utterance is produced it
brings it referent also along with it. For example
when the sound unit “Dog” are produced it also
brings an image or a mind impression along with it.
Because it creates an image of “a dog” in the hearer.
The “dog” will have all the universal quality what
make its essence. The relation between the elements
of the sign is thus inseparable. But out of its context it
signifies nothing unless its referent is known to its
context. Therefore locus also plays a vital role in
meaning generation.
2.2.3. The relational system
Saussure argued that signs only make sense
within a system where a number of signs are
involved. His theories of meaning are
obviously focused on structural relation. A
kind of abstract relation is vital than the
individual meaning of signs. It is clear from
this statement that functional aspect of a sign
is given more importance in the actualization
of meaning. Saussure did not define signs in
terms of some essential or intrinsic nature.
Ensygloge
An International Journal for Arts and Science
www.ensygloge.com
7
ISSN: 2583-1011
Vol.:1, Issue:1; January-June, 2021
Article No.: V1N1002
For Saussure, signs refer primarily to each
other. Within the language system,
‘everything depends on relations’ 17.
No sign makes sense on its own but only in relation to
other signs. Both signifier and signified are purely
relational entities.18 That means a sign gets and varies
its meaning in accordance with its relation to other
signs as well as its locus. “This common type of
variation is that a few signs of the same language
(ASL) are different across regions in North America;
nevertheless, ASL speakers still understand one
another. E.g. "supper" and "dinner" in English. "Flat"
in British English for "apartment" in American
English and "tube" for "television" respectively).”19
III. CONCLUSION
3.1. Introduction to Indian Linguistics
The Indian linguistic philosophers could develop their
own interpretations in the field of semantics. Among
these philosophers Panini has been considered an
important linguist in the development of Sanskrit
grammar.20 But here I am dealing with only the levels
of meaning of word and its semantic function in a
sentence. This semantic level is mainly discussed in
the Nyaya epistemology. There are four sources of
knowledge in this school. They are perception,
Inference, Verbal Testimony and Upamana. Among
these four sources the third one ( Sabdha or Verbal
Testimony) is going to be discussed in detail.
Aptavakyam Sabdhaha (Sentence from reliable
authority). How can it be possible? It is through word
which has semantic potency ( Semantic potency
means the capacity of a word in producing primary,
secondary and tertiary levels of meaning) we come
across the true knowledge. What is truth? It means
something true to the reality. A word being the
sensible unit of a sentence should be able to
communicate truth (Semantic existence). First among
the three semantic potency is Abita (Primary
meaning). It means literal meaning. Here vachaka is
the word and vachyartha is the meaning. There are
four kinds of primary meaning. They are 1. Meaning
by convention, 2. Derivative meaning, 3. Derivatively
Conventional meaning and 4. Derivatively different
and conventionally different meaning. When there is
inconsistency with the primary meaning we go for the
secondary meaning. It is very close to the primary
meaning. Here Lakshaka is the word and lakshyartha
is the meaning. Any idiomatic expression comes
under this category. There are thre kinds of Lakshana.
They are 1. Jahat (Exclusive implication )21, 2. Ajahat
(Inclusive)22 and Jahatajahat Lakshana (Exclusive-
Inclusive).23 The third kind within the semantic
potency is Vyanjana.20 In the book entitled Modern
Linguistics an Introduction S.K. Verma and N.
Krishnaswamy give an introduction to Panini: Panini
gives a scientific analysis of the structure of Sanskrit in
his Astadhyayi. Bloomfield described the grammar of
Panini as a monumental work of human intelligence.
Patanjali an early student of the Paninian School,
defined the purpose of the Astadhyayi as the
preservation of the ritual language in its traditional
form; the capacity of generation of forms from one
pattern to other; the sanctity of the grammatical science
itself as an integral part of scripture; the economy of
description to facilitate memorization; and the clarity of
description. Panini wrote a mathematical grammar
capable of generating new forms which also accounted
for all extant forms and construction in his language
(327). 21 Exclusive implication- Here primary meaning
is completely abandoned.
22 Inclusive- Primary meaning+ something else (e.g.
protect the ghee from the crows.) Anandhavardhana
speaks a lot on Vyanjana in his epoch making
scholastic work Dhwanyaloka. It is the suggestive
power of a language. It is what transforms a group of
words into poetry. Here Vyanjana is the word and
vyanjyartha is the meaning. It deals with the potential
suggestive sense. Rasa is the end result of suggestion.
It delights people. Anandhavardhana developed a new
theory which goes beyond meaning. For him poetry is
a combination of words that delight the reader.24 “The
third type of implied sense is 'rasadhvani'. It consists in
suggesting 'bhaava', feelings or sentiments. In rasa
dhvani emotion is conveyed through 'vyanjaka'. Rasa is
the subject of 'vyanjakaas' as differentiated from
abhidha and laksana. Its cognition is almost
simultaneous with the expressed.”25
Ensygloge
An International Journal for Arts and Science
www.ensygloge.com
8
ISSN: 2583-1011
Vol.:1, Issue:1; January-June, 2021
Article No.: V1N1002
26 Joby John, Expansive Grammar (Teekoy: Turn Books,
2015),4.
3.2. Comparison between signification and
suggestion
Meaning generation is a process where words are
associated to generate a particular meaning. The main
question addressed by this academic work is whether
there is a common ground in structural semantics and
suggestive power of a word or group of words.
Semantics and syntax are interrelated, that is, a
change in syntax causes a change in meaning.
Therefore both these faculties are universal properties
of languages, even at the single word level. To be
specific it is clear that the syntax of a sign (Here
syntax means the arrangement of signifier and the
signified) makes slight meaning variation. Therefore
when signification and suggestion are compared it can
be traced out that even within suggestion the internal
process that is taken place is signification. Sometimes
a word denies its meaningful existence by being
meaningful.26 That is, it gets meaning only when a
thing (which does an action, which is in a state or
with possession) is referred to by it and the referred
thing gets its identity only when other referred things
get their existence. Another difference between
signification and suggestion is that syntax and
semantics are highly correlated in signification
whereas in suggestion many signifiers are added to
another signifier. One common feature found in both
these items is the arbitrary nature. It is not clear how
the elements are conjoined within a sign and it is the
same when suggestion is also taken into
consideration. A sign may suggest different levels of
meaning according to the person who receive it,
because subjectivity also affects the meaning of a sign
in suggestion. Therefore signification and suggestion
are interrelated as if a signifier and signified within a
sign.
End Notes
1 David Crystal. The Cambridge Encyclopedia of
Language. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
2003). 408.
2 Joby John. Expansive Grammar. (Teekoy: Turn
Books, 2015)4.
3 Crystal.408.
4 Ibid., 407.
5 Ferdinand de Saussure, Course in general linguistics
(London: Forgotten Books, 2015.)
6 Ibid.,65.
7 Ibid.,66.
8 Ibid.,114.
9 Tanveer Ahmed Muhammadi, “Saussurian
Structuralism in Linguistics,” Journal of Literature,
Languages and Linguistics Vol.20 (2016): 26.
http://iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JLLL/article/viewFile
/29642/30435
(Figure 2.1)8
10 John E. Joseph, “Ferdinand de Saussure.” Linguistics
(June, 2017),
http://linguistics.oxfordre.com/view/10.1093/acrefore/97
80199384655.001.0001/acrefore-9780199384655-e-385.
11Saussure, 66.
12Ibid., 66-67.
(Figure 2.2)Concept and sound pattern12
13Ibid., 67
14 Ibid., 115.
15 Christopher Johnson, Derrida (New York:
Routledge, 1999), 34.
16Ibid., 66.
17 Saussure 1983, 121.
18 Ibid., 118.
19 “Language variation in sign language,”
https://www.handspeak.com/learn/index.php?id=111.
23 Exclusive Inclusive means “This is that.”
24 According to Anandvardhana and Dhvani-theorists,
Dhvani or poetic suggestion is the soul of poetry or
poetic composition and it is revealed to a sympathetic
enjoyer of poetic composition by an entirely distinct
power of a word called suggestion or Vyanjana.
25 “DHVANI AND RASA”, 108.
http://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/644/8/
08_chapter3.pdf
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Audi, Robert. The Cambridge Dictionary of
Philosophy. Cambridge, 1999.
Berne,M., and Matthew N. Levy. Physiology.
Missouri : St. Louis, 1993.
Bhartrhari. Vakyapadiya. Delhi: Shantilal Jain,
Jainendra Press, 1971.
Chomsky, Noam. Syntactic Structures. Berlin:
Mouton de Gruyter, 1957.
Crystal, David. The Cambridge Encyclopedia of
Language. Camebridge University,1999.
Deshpande, Madhav M., and Peter Edwin. Hook.
Indian linguistic studies: festschrift in honor of
George Cardona. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 2002.
Ensygloge
An International Journal for Arts and Science
www.ensygloge.com
9
ISSN: 2583-1011
Vol.:1, Issue:1; January-June, 2021
Article No.: V1N1002
Deshpande, Madhav M., and Peter Edwin. Hook.
Indian linguistic studies: festschrift in honor of
George Cardona. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 2002.
“DHVANI AND RASA”, 104-162.
http://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/644/8/
08_chapter3.pdf. (accessed on February 15, 2018).
Dornyei, Zoltal. The Psychology of Second Language
Acquisition. New York: Oxford, 2009.
Johnson, Christopher. Derrida. New York:
Routledge, 1999.
John, Joby. Expansive Grammar. (Teekoy: Turn
Books, 2015)4.
Joseph, John E. “Ferdinand de Saussure.” Linguistics
(June, 2017).
http://linguistics.oxfordre.com/view/10.1093/acrefore/
9780199384655.001.0001/acrefore-9780199384655-
e-385.
Joshi, S. D. Proceedings of the Winter Institute on
ancient Indian theories on sentence-meaning:
held in March 1979. Pune: University of Poona, 1980.
Joshi, S. D. Proceedings of the Winter Institute on
ancient Indian theories on sentence-meaning:
held in March 1979. Pune: University of Poona, 1980.
Krashen, S.D. Second Language Acquisition and
Second Language Learning. Pergamon Press,
Language, 2004. Print.
Linguistic and Cross-cultural Problems of
Translation. The Emporia State Research studies
Emporia Kansas State College Emporia, 20 Nov.
Web.
https://esirc.emporia.edu/bitstream/handle/12345.
“Language variation in sign language.”
https://www.handspeak.com/learn/index.php?id=111(
accessed on February 15, 2018).
Mishra, K.K. Bhartrhari’s Theory of Sphota. 25 Sept.
2013. Web.
Moyes, D, and Patricia M. Schutte. Principle of
Animal Physiology. New Delhi : Person.
Muhammadi , Tanveer Ahmed. “Saussurian
Structuralism in Linguistics.” Journal of Literature,
Languages and Linguistics Vol.20, (2016): 27-31. 13
Ensygloge
An International Journal for Arts and Science
www.ensygloge.com
10
ISSN: 2583-1011
Vol.:1, Issue:1; January-June, 2021
Article No.: V1N1002
http://iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JLLL/article/viewF
ile/29642/30435 (accessed February 15,2018).
Nye, Andrea. Philosophy of language the big
questions. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing,
2004.
Raja, K. Kunjunni. Indian theories of meaning.
Chennai: The Adyar Library and Research
Centre, 2000.
Randall, John Herman. The power of suggestion: the
law of suggestion, auto-Suggestion. H.M.
Caldwell, 1909.
Sapir, Edward. Language: an introduction to the
study of speech. San Diego: Harcourt Brace
Jovanovich, 1993.
Saussure, Ferdinand De, Charles Bally, and Albert
Sechehaye. Course in general linguistics.
London: Forgotten Books, 2015.
Sapir, Edward. Language: an introduction to the
study of speech. San Diego: Harcourt Brace
Jovanovich, 1993.
Saussure, Ferdinand De, Charles Bally, and Albert
Sechehaye. Course in general linguistics.
London: Forgotten Books, 2015.
Saussure, Ferdinand De. 1974. Course in general
linguistics. New York: Fontana/ Collins.
Saussure, Ferdinand. Course in general linguistics.
London: Forgotten Books, 2015.
Sharath Ganga Publications, 2004. Print.
Sheorey, Ravi. Studies in Linguistics.Bhartrhari’s
Sphota Theory : An Exploration in Semantics,
Staal, Frits. “Indian Theories of Meaning.” Concise
History of the Language Sciences, 1995, pp. 66–71.,
doi:10.1016/b978-0-08-042580-1.50013-1.
Staal, Frits. “Indian Theories of Meaning.” Concise
History of the Language Sciences, 1995, pp.
66–71., doi:10.1016/b978-0-08-042580-1.50013-1.
Swan, Michael. Grammar. Oxford University Press,
2005. Print.
Unithiri,NVP. Sabdhartha Sidhantangal
Samskruthathil. Trivandrum: The State Institute of
University Press, 2009. Print.
Verma,SK, and N.Krishnaswamy. Modern
Linguistics:An Introduction.New Delhi: Oxford
1. Wadsworth, 2008. Print.
