Is it true that Chomsky made Saussure obsolete and how?

How?

I like to say these things:
The US government acts in its own best interest
Businesses act in their own best interest
There are things that people don't know
And these are things we've known about these things for centuries. Even the Greeks knew this. Just look at ancient Athens. Aristotle.

>Just look at ancient Athens. Aristotle.
Really got my ol' noggin' joggin'

Also, in case you are interested in phonology (maybe you are not) I would highly recommend Phonemics by Kenneth Pike. It's an old-school linguistics text that doesn't quite get the love it deserves anymore. I don't know, I think that being able to do a bit of structuralist contrastive analysis of a language is an interesting skill to have, and it's really pretty easy. And for me I think it gave me a deeper understanding of structuralism. I think this is because phonemes are not really signs, but they are semiotic units. (/p/ and Yea Forums don't mean anything on their own, but they can change the meaning [e.g. pat and bat] or more specifically the presence or absence of voicing and aspiration can change the meaning.) So I guess that abstractness or absence of meaning can make it a little easier to focus on the relationships of the units within the system, and then you can apply that same thinking to other systems like morphology, syntax, anthropology (like kinship systems--Ward Goodenough is good for this) and all kinds of other things.

Do you have these authors you mention in epub/mobi/azw? I can only find them in PDF.

Attached: substitute for characterization.png (1280x705, 115K)

Low estimates of the Cambodian genocide is 1/5th to 1/4 of the population, I've seen figures as high as 1/3; these figures put it between 1.5 - 2.5mm deaths. Too bad Chomsky picked one of the worst genocides in history to make his stand on, because he did have a point to make about American imperialism -- had he just listened to the Cambodian refugees though, he would have realized it was every bit as bad as it looked over there, if not worse. The most sickening part about it though it he will still defend his statements on Cambodia, saying "according to the facts of the time, I was right". No, Chomsky, no matter what your facts said, they really were bashing infants against trees to save bullets.

Attached: Cambodia-tree-beating-children-horizontal-large-gallery.jpg (980x552, 287K)

robot tiddies

>beat
is this past tense or present tense here?

>Chomsky made Saussure obsolete
The last few surviving European structuralist linguists go with Hjelmslev, they are not saussurians. If someone made Saussure obsolete, it had to be Saussure.
>I read some Eco
Had you really read Eco's Trattato di Semiotica Generale, you would have seen it has a lengthy bibliography that should have kept you quite busy with catching up with the then current year.

>Hjelmslev
based