Jane Denson, 9/24

        Last class' discussion of both De Saussure and Barthes helped me apply their theoretical ideas into my own life. While reading their works and unpacking the various material presented, I made some observations concerning linguistics and the way text is digested. In regards to De Saussure, I found his theory quite redundant, yet tactical in terms of his approach to supporting his perspective on linguistics. From what I came to understand, language as human beings is based on past experience, which, in my eyes, makes a great deal of sense, especially since I am bilingual. Due to the fact that I speak both English and Spanish (primarily English), I am better able to recognize the signifier and signified concept that De Saussure discusses. Additionally, both languages feature words that are nearly identical with their spelling and meaning, but obviously divergent with their pronunciations. However, there are words in Spanish, for example, that look like they mean one thing in English, but actually mean something else. An example of this would be "los parentes," which is Spanish for "relatives," but falsely appears to mean "parents" from an English perspective. Not only that, but this particular theoretical work made me realize how linguistics vary with their effect on each unique language. I know that simply because in Spanish, everything is more concise and specific, whereas in English, words can be much more general or broad. A prime example of this would be using "you" in both languages. In Spanish, there are different conjugations based on how the word "you" is used. "Tú" is informal, "usted" is formal, "vosotros" is plural (and only if you are in Spain), and "ustedes" is also plural. On the other hand, when we say "you" in English, we say that same word for all purposes.

        After analyzing Barthes' theoretical presentation of texts of pleasure and texts of bliss, which essentially relates to the idea of having readerly texts and writerly texts, I was able to further grapple with the manner in which humans consume the texts they are exposed to in their lives. Readerly text is considered passive and doesn't require the reader to go to great lengths in order to properly digest the information given to them. Writerly text is best described as one that forces the reader to go between the lines and fill in the gap they have in their minds, which Barthes calls tmesis. It is this notion that indeed reminds me of CMC 100 when we discussed and covered the notion of closure, as well as how its relation to comic (book) panels indicates the idea that we fill in the missing action in-between said panels. Therefore, it should be known that Barthes' theory can be translated to various types of texts, including literary and cinematic ones.