Reading Response 1

What came first, Semiotics or Language?

After reading and annotating, finding out what semiotics even is, and learning about Umberto Eco, Saussure's, Roland Barthes, and other linguists and philosophers' points of view, I still have not made up my mind on which one is part of the other. I feel like this dilemma is very similar to the famous question of what came first, the chicken or the egg. I believe that language is everything that demonstrates something and sends a message—body language, a language using words, braille, sign language, and others. Because of this, I do think that signs and thus semiotics are a type of language. Nonetheless, I believe that language could also be a type of semiotic or way of communicating something. I do not think that Bloomfield was wrong when he stated, "Linguistics is the chief contributor to semiotics." Still, I also do not feel that Roland Barthes's opinion of semiotics is a branch of linguistics is untrue. This is because I feel like they are so closely related that they could, or maybe actually are the same thing after all. The answer to my question then becomes another question: Could semiotics and language be the same thing instead of being encapsulated one inside the other? I think they could be the same thing. Honestly, I feel like there are so many things that could be simplified instead of making them harder for the audience to grasp and understand, and the debate of whether semiotics or language came first is so unnecessary as they could mean, and probably are, the same thing.