syncategorematic word synsemantic word synchrony vs diachrony [Grk chrónos ‘time’]

After the distinction langue vs parole, the most important methodological distinction established by F. de Saussure for the interpretation and investigation of language as a closed system. It is only on the axis of simultaneity (i.e. a fixed moment in time) that language can be analyzed as a system of values in which the value of an individual element results from the relational context of all values in the system. Synchrony refers to a state fixed in time, while diachrony refers to changing states of a language between different time periods. While descriptive synchronic research investigates the relationship of individual elements to a balanced linguistic system that can be described structurally, historically oriented diachronic investigations can, according to de Saussure, only address the replacement of single elements by other elements, or the change of individual elements. This devaluation of historical investigation, which was a reaction against the historical linguistics advocated by the Neogrammarians, was in turn subject to criticism (see W.von Wartburg, A.Martinet, and E. Coseriu). Owing to this, diachronic (historical) linguistics of the structuralist variety is still lively today. Coseriu and poststructuralist linguistic research influenced by W.Labov argue against the distinction synchrony-diachrony as having any basis in reality.