La Problématique phonologique: du structuralisme linguistique comme idéologie scientifique by Anne-Gaëlle Toutain (review)

Ferdinand de Saussure's Cours de linguistique générale focuses on the underlying structure of language (langue) rather than on language use (parole). Anne-Gaëlle Toutain's study assesses the extent to which Saussure's theory of structuralism has informed and relates to the development of phonological theory in the works of four eminent European linguists: Roman Jakobson, Louis Hjelmslev, Émile Benveniste, and André Martinet. Toutain argues that Saussure's theories on language and the questions raised by phonological theories are inherently different in scope and focus, the former focusing on langue and the latter on parole. Her book is presented, essentially, as an attempt to integrate the empirical and scientific study of sounds into the study of linguistic structure: the compatibility of 'la problématique phonologique' with Saussure's structuralism is framed, in the first part of the study, in terms of the relationship between the smallest meaningful unit of sound, the phoneme, and Saussure's concepts of the signifier and the signified. While the signifier–signified relationship is compatible with the sound–meaning relationship, the latter has not, Toutain argues, been subjected to adequate systematic analysis. Because of this need to establish systematically and empirically the relationships between these concepts as well as to establish an adequate system of classification for sound–meaning relationships, the 'problématique phonologique' is presented as primarily analytical rather than theoretical in nature; the importance of empirical data to the development of phonological theory is emphasized. Unlike Jakobson and Martinet's largely a-theoretical focus on sound–meaning relationships, Hjelmslev's analysis is shown to be concerned with the relationship between form and substance; for this reason, Hjelmslev is considered to be most closely aligned with Saussure's theory of structuralism. The second part of this study considers structuralism, as conceived by Jakobson, Martinet, Hjelmslev, and Benveniste, as 'une idéologie scientifique', defined by Georges Canguilhem as a discourse that does not recognize the methodological tools needed to respond to the scientific questions central to the analysis (Canguilhem, 'Qu'est-ce qu'une idéologie scientifique?', in Idéologie et rationalité dans l'histoire des sciences de la vie (Paris: Vrin, 1977), pp. 35–45). The study concludes by positing structuralism as a sort of 'pilot study', or precursor, to phonological theory, the latter providing an analysis of parole that attempts to reconcile data with the fundamental abstract theoretical concepts defining structuralism. While there is a tendency to cite large extracts of text, which has the effect of breaking up the prose discussion, Toutain's study provides a comprehensive analysis and comparison of the seminal theoretical works included, and the discussion rightly calls for the integration of systematic empirical analyses into phonological theory.