Skip to content
Licensed Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter Mouton November 16, 2017

Meaning-Centrism in Roland Barthes’ Structuralism

Shuping Zhang
From the journal Chinese Semiotic Studies

Abstract

Meaning and form are two important concepts in philosophy, literature, and other humanities, and discussions on the dialectical relationship between meaning and form have lasted for 2,000 years. Though the importance of meaning was considered, attention, interest, and studies were overwhelmingly focused on form much more than meaning, especially in the popular period of aestheticism, formalism, and structuralism. Henceforth, form retained ultimate supremacy over meaning. Roland Barthes was one of the giants of structuralism and was traditionally regarded as a formalist during his structuralist period (1950s–1967). In fact, Barthes’ semiotic thought was composed of two branches, cultural semiotics and literary semiotics. He valued meaning and the way of meaning-making in his cultural semiotics, and was devoted to exploration of hidden meaning, as well as the relationship between meaning and form. He found three layers of meaning hiding in mass media, i.e. denotation, connotation, and myth, which shape and reshape readers’ ideology, and persuade them to accept the ideology of the middle class. While forms are plentiful, even overflowing, meaning is relatively simple, but meaning is of supreme importance, as it manipulates forms in an implicit way. Consequently, Roland Barthes was really meaning-oriented or meaning-centrist in his cultural semiotic thought.

Keywords: form; formalism; meaning; myth

  1. Funding: The project A Semiotic Analysis on Nuo Culture of Baima Tibetan is supported by the Humanities and Social Sciences Foundation, Ministry of Education, China (Grant No. 16YJA850006).

References

Barthes, Roland. 1977. ImageMusicText. London: Fontana.Search in Google Scholar

Barthes, Roland. 1987. Mythologies. http://www.blog.edu.cn/user4/caojinjin/archives/2007/1727819.shtml (accessed 11 October 2008).Search in Google Scholar

Barthes, Roland. 1990. Elements of Semiology. New York: Hill & Wang.Search in Google Scholar

Bignell, Jonathan. 1997. Media Semiotics: An Introduction. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Chandler, Daniel. 2007. Semiotics for Beginners. http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Documents/S4B/semiotic.html (accessed 1 October 2008).10.4324/9780203014936Search in Google Scholar

Fiske, John. 1982. Introduction to Communication Studies. London: Routledge.10.4324/9780203323212Search in Google Scholar

Foster, Elaine. 2001. A Semiotic Analysis of Alcohol Commercials. http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/sections/advert07.php (accessed 1 June 2007).Search in Google Scholar

Gaines, Elliot. 2001. Semiotic Analysis of Myth: A Proposal for an Applied Methodology. Semiotics 17(2). 311–327.10.5840/ajs200117227Search in Google Scholar

Hawkes, Terence. 1977. Structuralism and Semiotics. London: Routledge.10.4324/9780203443934Search in Google Scholar

Hjelmslev, Louis. 1961. Prolegomena to a Theory of Language (trans. Francis J Whitfield). Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Search in Google Scholar

McNeill, Tony. 1996. Roland Barthes: Mythologies. http://www.eng.fju.edu.tw/Literary_Criticism/structuralism/Barthes_myth.htm (accessed 1 June 2007).Search in Google Scholar

Saussure, Ferdinand de. 2001. Course in General Linguistics. London: Duckworth; Beijing: Foreign Language and Research Press.Search in Google Scholar

Silverman, David & Brian Torode. 1980. The Material Word: Some Theories of Language and its Limits. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Search in Google Scholar

Wanyong, Liu. 2006. Xifang Xingshi Zhuyi Suyuan (A survey on Western formalism in the Chinese language). Beijing: Kunlun Press.Search in Google Scholar

Xiaofeng, Wu. 2001. Luolan Bate Fuhaoxue Yanjiu (On Roland Barthes’ semiotics in the Chinese language). MA thesis. Wuhan: Wuhan University.Search in Google Scholar

Xiaofeng, Wu. 2004. Fuhao yu Yiyi (Signs and meaning in the Chinese language), Academia Studies 18(3). 119–122.Search in Google Scholar

Dingyi, Yao. 2003. Lun Xifang Zhexue Gudian Lixingzhuyi de Lishi liubian (On development of Western classical philosophical rationalism in the Chinese language). http://www.studa.net/2003/4-21/2003421172638.html (accessed 8 May 2007).Search in Google Scholar

Li, Zhao & Jingan Xu. 1988. Weimei Zhuyi (Aestheticism in the Chinese language). Beijing: China Renmin University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Guangqian, Zhu. 1983. Xifang Meixueshi (History of Western aestheticism in the Chinese language) Vol. I. Beijing: People’s Literature Publishing House.Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2017-11-16
Published in Print: 2017-8-28

© 2017 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston