One idea from this chapter that strikes me as interesting, important, or significant regarding the relationship between language and meaning is the idea of how both language and meaning can be signified through their differences.  A text’s meaning can be determined by the text itself or by the context in which it was written. For example, while reading a text, it is necessary for us to consider the whole picture, not just the literal words used, but also why these words were chosen as opposed to others. And by looking at these differences and contrasts we can identify the meaning of the text, poem, or whatever we are reading.

On the other hand, according to Ferdinand de Saussure, a language is a system of difference. Language is a system of signs and key facts; Saussure refers to this as the “Arbitrary nature of the linguistic sign.” Saussure believes that signs consist of a form and a meaning, and associations between the two are determined by convention  rather than natural resemblances. In this case, it’s the convention between the   sender and the recipient, which implies the existence of a connection between them.  Also, in addition to the sounds words make and the meaning they convey, the same sound does not equate to the same meaning. For instance, the words vow, wow sounds the same, but they convey two different meaning. So, therefore, the meaning of a word is made up of its (form) signifier and its (meaning) signified. which suggests, language is a way of thinking and expressing ideas.  This idea jumps out at me as being important because through reading this chapter “Language, Meaning and interpretation” by Jonathan Culler, I became aware of how language produces meaning and the relationship between language and meaning.

2. In Chapter 5 of Literary Theory Jonathan Culler introduced us to four rhetoric techniques – Metaphor, Metonymy, Synecdoche, and Irony. After reading the “Yet Do I Marvel” written by Countee Cullen, I would say that the speaker used figurative language like metaphor in the poem. To further support my claim, the metaphor was being used in the 4th line of the poem where the speaker says, “Why flesh that mirrors Him must someday die.” By stating that humans reflect God’s image, the speaker creates a metaphor. In this case, human flesh is compared to a mirror, which reflects God’s image. In other words, “Flesh that mirrors him” is a metaphor referring to God creating human beings according to his own resemblance. This technique jumps out at me as being interesting because metaphor make writing easier to comprehend and respond to. Metaphor has played an important role here. For example, With the use of metaphors, Curler creates a vivid imaginary for the readers and makes the poem interesting yet understandable.  I believe metaphor helps shape the meaning of the poem more effective way. For example, metaphors allow the poet to better convey their emotions and thoughts. Lastly, the use of metaphor gave the poem an interesting meaning which I found enjoyable.  As Culler stated in chapter 5 a metaphor can carry a complex concept, even an entire theory, which makes it the most valuable rhetorical figure for supporting a claim.