ABSTRACT
In arguing for the processes of the syntagm, I have argued for the importance of parole as against langue. But my parole is still an idealized parole’, it is not a total accumulation of all the raw data, all the verbal utterances which could ever be recorded in the world. For one thing, I have conducted my argument on the basis of full-sentence utterances, cheerfully disregarding the many utterances composed of just a single word or two. ‘Forceps!’ murmurs the surgeon to the nurse, and perhaps ‘Sterilized?’ ‘Elementary!’ says Mr Holmes to Dr Watson; ‘A horse! A horse!’ cries bad King Richard. Given that full sentences are far less common in oral utterance than in written utterance, and given that the quantity of oral utterance in the world far exceeds the quantity of written utterance, it would not be surprising if, on some ultimate quantificational measure of the raw data, full-sentence utterances actually turned out to be in the minority. In spite of which, I have chosen to take full sentences as my starting-point. How can this be justified?
