Critic speak is tough, but we've got you covered.
Quote :The Subject of Semiotics
The unconscious is obliged to express itself exclusively through “thing-presentations”—i.e. the mnemic traces left behind by perceptual flow. Freud suggests that these memories are predominantly visual and auditory. The preconscious, on the other hand, has at its disposal a double signifying register, consisting of “thing-presentations” and “word-presentations.” These two categories coincide with what Saussure calls “signifieds” and “signifiers”; the thing-presentation, like the linguistic signified, designates a concept, while the word-presentation or linguistic signifier refers to a sound image. Once again we are reminded of the profound interconnections between linguistic semiotics and psychoanalysis, interconnections which result both from the fact that language can only be activated through discourse, within which the subject figures centrally, and from the fact that subjectivity it itself a product of two signifying activities, one unconscious and the other preconscious or conscious.
As this quote shows, Silverman focuses not just on semiotics but on the links we can draw between semiotics and psychoanalysis. Taking the Saussurian model of signifier and signified as her starting point, she suggests that the preconscious mind works in a similar way: discussing Freudian theory, for example, she sees the “thing-presentation” as equivalent to the signified, and the “word-presentation” corresponding to the signifier.
Since we’re dealing with semiotics, there’s no need to get into the details of psychoanalysis right now (and what a tragedy that is). What Silverman helps demonstrate, though, is that linguistics isn’t some sort of abstract realm, and that the structure of language is similar to the structure of the mind. This ain’t no coincidence, either: signification doesn’t exist in a bubble but is produced and consumed by human subjects.
As Silverman points out, language can only be activated by discourse, and discourse isn’t neutral, but part of culture. “Discourse” is another term that gets thrown around a lot in academia, and it’s important to recognize that it’s not just another word for language or communication. When we use this word, we’re referring to how people communicate in a particular context; in fact, academic communication is itself a discourse (you know, the dreaded “academic-speak” that killed the dinosaurs).
The thing to remember here is that language and culture aren’t abstract; they’re developed by human beings. Structuralist semiotics might sometimes seem to overlook this human element, but Silverman suggests that the structure of language can’t be separated from the structure of the mind. So if you think it’s all in your head, then it probably is. Not that there’s anything unnatural about that (just make sure you question what “natural” is, though).