Historic Structures – The Prague School Project by F. W. Galan
Background Basis and Inference
I would like to first talk a little bit about the linguistic circle of Prague, which is also called the linguistic school of thought of Prague. It was an influential group of literary critics and linguists who came together in Prague with a common desire to develop a new approach to linguistics. The most famous period of the circle is between 1926, it’s formal beginning, and the beginning of World War II, when Prague hoped for freedom and democracy for artists and scholars in Central Europe. He emphasized the spirit of collective action, the spectacle of knowledge synthesis, and the socially established commitment to the Prague Circle’s appreciation and encouragement of scholarships.
The first president of the Prague Linguistic Circle, William Mathews, was joined by Roman Jacobsen, Nikolai Trobetsky, and Sergei Karsovsky, as well as famous Czech literary scholars Rene Velek and John Makauski. His work and thought completely separated him from Ferdinand de Saussure’s classical linguistic-structural conception or at least made it almost ascetic. He suggested that these methods of studying the function or mythology of the sounds of speech or discourse could be applied to any language in harmony with it as it exists, and differently in any language as it changes.
The functionality of the elements of language and the importance of its social function were important aspects of its research program. He developed methods of structural literary analysis during 1928–1939. After World War II, the Circle no longer functioned as a linguist’s circle, but the Prague School continued as a major force for linguistic functionality. All the same (separated from the Copenhagen School or English Linguistics after the work of J. R. Firth and later Michael Holliday). But it has had a lasting effect on linguistics and semiotics.
Structural linguistics is generally held to be dynamic with a static language system in the context of language history. Yet in the 1920s Prague linguistic circles solved the structural dilemma of a system that ceases to function as a system after undergoing this change. The study of language changes should be about the whole system, not isolation. However, no language system is absolutely self-sufficient, nor is it possible to predict changes in language. Its because the language has to be adapted to concrete conditions.
Similarly, literary history seems to be largely dynamic under the system, but at the same time, considering the neutral effects, only the symbolic concept can explain its perpetual development. In this way, the internal aspects of the literary forms in the Prague structure, the systemic changes, and the social aspects involved in their reception by the readers have been studied. Finally, structural literary theory defines the role of individual artists and literary creators, the originality of which is seen as a dialectical denial of organized literary structure.
In a lengthy study of this book of Czech structures and indicators in English, F. W. Galan explores a major twentieth-century school of thought, filling in the gaps between the Russian formality of the twentieth century and French structure. He records the evolution within the Prague linguistic circle of ideas that are related to the change of literature over time and the place of literature in society. In doing so, he reveals how the work of the Prague Linguistic Circle from 1928 to 1946 went against the allegations of its critics. Which is inherently immoral in linguistics, literary theory, film studies, and related fields. In particular, the Prague School of Thought, through the scholars of Roman Jacobsen and John Makarovsky, illustrates this point. Overcoming work disruptions was a real challenge.
He wrote an article on Prague’s linguistic circle, “Prague’s School.” Which is included in my book “Critical Address” 2017 in Mumbai, India.
Structural Critical Theory
Discussions of the structural critical theory seem incomplete without the “Prague School of Thought”. A useful book in this regard is “The Historical Structure” by The Prague School Project. 1928 Written by FW GALAN, 1946 The book was published by the University of Texas at Austin Press in 1988. The book described Prague’s linguistic circle as a “bridge” between French structures and Russian Hittites. In this book, Glenn provides an excellent analysis of the evolving literary linguistics of the time. Influenced by this school of thought, it developed new theories of literary and linguistic studies. It was also an “anti-historian” theory, developed by Jacob Sun and Makatafsky. The book elaborates on these topics:
- Historical linguistics and literary evolution
- The poetic structure of the historical order
- Signal correction
- The reader’s historical and individual poetic ability
The book under review also lists sermons on poetry, aesthetics and symbols, with reference to the Prague School.