Structuralist criticism

Structuralist criticism was emerged in the 1960s, is a study of language that focuses not on the communicative function of language, but on examining the conditions that allow language and meaning to derive. Structuralist criticism examines how the elements of language are organised in order to produce the effect it has.

The principles of structuralism can be traced to work of the Swiss linguist Ferdinand de Saussure (1857-1913), who pointed out that language was not a random collection of words, but one that contained a structured system of relationships. Saussure conveyed that a word was a linguistic sign and has two interrelated sides to it- the signifier and the signified. The signifier refers to the sound image or the word (for example the word 'dog'); the signified is the concept which is being referred by the signifier (that is, the actual dog itself). The relationship between the signifier and the signified is very  arbitrary (the letters that form the written word 'dog' or the sounds that constitute the spoken word 'dog' have no real connection to the living animal they represent), but they work together to create meaning. But the meaning of signifier can only be understood in relation to other signifiers (we know what 'spoon' signifies something, because we can differentiate it from a 'fork' or a 'knife'). Signs are often understood in terms of binary opposites such as light in contrast to dark, strong in contrast to weak, realist in contrast to romantic and capitalist in contrast to socialist. Thus we see that there exists a vast and complex system of interrelated signs which derive their meaning based on their differences and relation to one another. Language consists of artificial constructs,  a system of structures that mediates between us and external reality.

Discovering the system of structures that create meaning in literature was the main focus of the structuralist school of criticism. Structuralist critics try to examine how these artificial constructs work. They do not try to interpret the meaning of an individual work or judge it. They are more interested in language and grammar, and focus on the narrative structures. They preferred the word ‘text’ to ‘work’ to emphasize their point that all literature was subject to a set of cords rather than being a unique product of author's mind. They also questioned the belief that the text was a representation of reality as they believed that all signification was arbitrary.


The most important figures connected with this school of thought are Claude Levi Strauss, Lucien Goldmann, Roland Barthes, Louis Althusser and Jonathan Culler.