Introduction
Welcome. In our last lesson, we explored how Merleau-Ponty views communication through the lens of gesture. We concluded that the spoken word is a "vocal gesture"—not a label for a pre-existing thought, but the very enactment of meaning in the world. This account beautifully explains the power of creative expression, where a new thought seems to come into being at the very moment it is uttered.
However, this raises a question. Much of our daily language use feels far from creative. When we exchange pleasantries, follow a recipe, or use technical jargon, we seem to be using a pre-established system rather than inventing meaning anew. How does Merleau-Ponty's philosophy account for this more conventional, habitual aspect of language?
To address this, he introduces a crucial distinction. Today, your learning outcome is to distinguish between 'speaking speech' (parole parlante) and 'spoken speech' (parole parlée). Understanding this distinction is key to grasping his full theory of expression, which accommodates both the creative power of language and its existence as a stable, shared institution.
1. Defining the Two Poles of Language
Merleau-Ponty begins by identifying two fundamental aspects, or poles, of our linguistic life. On the one hand, we have language as an existing cultural object—the dictionary, the grammar, the set of common expressions we inherit. On the other hand, we have the living act of expression that brings meaning into the world. These are spoken speech and speaking speech, respectively.
The following reading from an academic paper provides a clear and precise definition of these two concepts.
[PDF] Merleau-Ponty on Speaking and Spoken Speech - PhilArchive
To begin, let's establish the definitions of our key terms. The paper 'Merleau-Ponty on Speaking and Spoken Speech' by Hayden Kee offers a concise introduction to the distinction as it appears in Phenomenology of Perception.
Please read the section titled 'Speaking and Spoken Speech.' It begins: 'It is in the context of this chapter...' and ends just before the next heading. As you read, focus on identifying the two core terms and the alternative names Merleau-Ponty uses for each. Note the essential characteristics he ascribes to both parole parlante and parole parlée.
As the text clarifies:
- Spoken Speech (parole parlée): This is language as a constituted system. It includes established vocabulary and syntax, sedimented meanings from past acts of expression. Merleau-Ponty also calls this "secondary expression" or "empirical language." It is the language we find already available to us.
- Speaking Speech (parole parlante): This is the originary, creative act of expression. It is speech that gives birth to new meaning, where "unformulated sense...is truly created as sense." This is the authentic gesture we discussed in the last lesson, exemplified by a child's first word, a lover articulating a feeling for the first time, or an author finding the perfect phrase.
At first glance, this might seem like a simple classification of different kinds of sentences. But, as we'll see, the relationship is more complex and intimate.
2. A Crucial Clarification: Dimensions, Not Kinds
A common misunderstanding is to treat parole parlante and parole parlée as two mutually exclusive categories of speech acts—as if poetry were purely parlante and reciting a grocery list were purely parlée. For Merleau-Ponty, this is a false dichotomy.
Instead, they are better understood as two dimensions or moments present in all speech. Every act of speaking simultaneously relies on the already-spoken and, in its own way, speaks anew. The following reading provides a rigorous argument for this more nuanced interpretation, which will likely resonate with your preference for systematic reasoning.
[PDF] Merleau-Ponty on Speaking and Spoken Speech - PhilArchive
Now we move to a critical point. Hayden Kee's paper argues forcefully against the simple interpretation of speaking and spoken speech as two different types of utterances. He shows that such a distinction is phenomenologically untenable.
Please read the section titled 'Two Kinds of Speech?'. Follow the author's line of reasoning closely. He methodically dismantles the idea of a clean separation by analyzing: The context of spoken speech required for even the most innovative expressions (the idea of a 'coherent deformation'). The continuous, non-punctual nature of language acquisition. The way a word's meaning is always shifting based on context. \nThis will lead to the conclusion that they are better understood as 'moments' of experience rather than distinct kinds of speech.
Kee's argument shows that the boundary is porous, if not illusory.
- The most innovative poet still uses the words and syntax of an existing language (parole parlée). Their creativity is a "coherent deformation" of this existing system, not a creation ex nihilo.
- The most mundane utterance—even saying "hello"—is spoken in a unique present, a new context. It is a fresh act that takes up and re-animates the old formula. As Kee notes, "Every reiteration is in fact a reappropriation within a new context."
Therefore, speaking and spoken speech are not separate things. They are two intertwined aspects of a single, dynamic process. The examples Merleau-Ponty gives (the child, the lover, the philosopher) are simply cases where the parlante dimension is especially visible.
3. The Relationship: Interdependence and Ontological Priority
If parlante and parlée are intertwined dimensions, what is the precise nature of their relationship? It is a paradoxical one, characterized by both mutual dependence and a subtle form of priority.
-
Interdependence: They require each other. Without the established system of spoken speech, we would have no medium through which to express ourselves. Speaking speech would be mute. Conversely, without the living act of speaking speech, the established system would be nothing more than dead markings in a book—a fossilized relic. It is the constant act of "taking up" the language that keeps it alive.
-
Ontological Priority: Despite this interdependence, Merleau-Ponty gives an ontological priority to speaking speech. This is a crucial philosophical point. Language as an abstract system (parole parlée) is a cultural ideality; its existence is secondary and dependent. The primary reality is the concrete, embodied act of expression by a living subject. The system only exists because it is continuously instituted and sustained by the community of speaking subjects.
The final reading explores this complex relationship.
[PDF] Merleau-Ponty on Speaking and Spoken Speech - PhilArchive
We can now analyze the relationship between these two dimensions more precisely. It involves both mutual dependence in practice and a fundamental priority in principle. This section clarifies this dynamic, contrasting Merleau-Ponty's view with other influential thinkers.
Please read the section 'A Question of Priorities.' Focus on understanding the two facets of the relationship: Interdependence: How is every speech act a 'paradoxical operation' that both uses and modifies given senses? Ontological Priority: In what specific sense is speech primary with respect to language? Pay attention to the analogy with tools: 'a hammer is only a hammer in light of subjects who take it up as a hammer.' How does this apply to language?
As Kee puts it, Merleau-Ponty's position asserts an "ontological priority... of the real over the ideal, of the concrete, constituting act of expression over the abstract, constituted system of conventional significations." This grounds the entire phenomenon of language in the lived, embodied subject, a core theme of our course.
Conclusion
Today, we have dissected Merleau-Ponty's fundamental distinction between the two poles of language. This resolves the tension between viewing language as a creative gesture and as a stable institution by showing them to be two sides of the same coin.
Key Takeaways:
- Spoken speech (parole parlée) is the sedimented, established system of language that we inherit as a cultural object.
- Speaking speech (parole parlante) is the authentic, creative act of expression that brings meaning into being and sustains the linguistic system.
- These are not two separate kinds of speech but two intertwined dimensions present in every linguistic act.
- Their relationship is one of interdependence, but speaking speech holds ontological priority because the abstract system of language only exists through the continuous, living acts of expression by embodied subjects.
Preview of the Next Lesson:
Having explored intercorporeality, gestural meaning, and the dynamics of speaking/spoken speech, we now have a comprehensive view of Merleau-Ponty's theory of expression. In our next lesson, we will synthesize these ideas to address the learning outcome: Analyze how Merleau-Ponty's account of expression challenges intellectualist theories of language. This will involve consolidating our understanding to formulate a robust critique of traditional models of language and mind.