A new language ontology: from structure to assemblage

The article addresses the problem of the ontology of language and proposes a radical reexamination of the dominant linguistic model of “language as structure." The author critiques the structuralist ontology that naturalizes the notion of autonomous “languages” and substitutes the living diversity of speech practices with abstract, codified objects. As an alternative, a conceptual framework is presented in which language is understood as a processual, materially grounded practice existing within heterogeneous sociomaterial assemblages. The need is emphasized to abandon the monolithic “monoglossic” view and shift to a plural ontology of language that recognizes a pluriverse of coexisting linguistic realities. Methodologically, the research draws on a combination of contemporary ontological and linguistic approaches. It employs assemblage theory, which posits the heterogeneity and dynamism of social objects, as well as an enactivist approach in cognitive science, which emphasizes the embodied, ecological nature of cognition. Attention is paid to the material dimension of linguistic phenomena, and the principle of multinaturalism is applied, affirming the multiplicity of ontological perspectives. Furthermore, the author integrates the theory of performativity, C. Peirce's concept of the materiality of the sign, and an assemblage-enactivist model of communication. This interdisciplinary synthesis provides a methodological foundation for a new perspective on language and communication. Applying this approach demonstrates that language emerges as a complex, heterogeneous ontological “assemblage.” It is not an autonomous system, but a dynamic network of interactions among bodily, material, and semiotic elements, in which meaning emerges through indexical, embodied, and medial operations. In this way, the myth of language's “naturalness” as a fixed essence is overcome - showing that so-called “languages” are not given from the outset as static objects, but rather are processes rooted in concrete assemblages of people, artifacts, and places. The author declares no conflicts of interests.

Keywords

Authors

References