riting fixes on some material aspect of language, such as a metaphor used by a writer, or the etymology of a word . Overall it seems to aim for an engaged warmth rather than detached coolness.
. Attitude to language. Structuralists accept that the world is constructed through language, in the sense that we do not have access to reality other than through the linguistic medium. All the same, it decides to live with that fact and continue to use language to think and perceive with. After all, language is an orderly system, not a chaotic one, so realising our dependence upon it need not induce intellectual despair.contrast, post-structuralism is much more fundamentalist in insisting upon the consequences of the view that, in effect, reality itself is textual. Post-structuralism develops what threaten to become terminal anxieties about the possibility of achieving any knowledge through language. The verbal sign, in its view, is constantly floating free of the concept it is supposed to designate. Thus, the post-structuralist's way of speaking about language involves a rather obsessive imagery based on liquids - signs float free of what they designate, meanings are fluid, and subject to constant slippage < span align = "justify"> or spillage . This linguistic liquid, slopping about and swilling over unpredictably, defies our attempts to carry signification carefully from giver to < span align = "justify"> receive 'in the containers we call words. We are not fully in control of the medium of language, so meanings cannot be planted in set places, like somebody planting a row of potato seeds; they can only be randomly scattered or disseminated , like the planter walking along and scattering seed with broad sweeps of the arm, so that much of it lands unpredictably or drifts in the wind., the meanings words have can never be guaranteed one hundred per cent pure. Thus, words are always contaminated by their opposites - you can't define night without reference to day, or good without reference to evil. Or else they are interfered with by their own history, so that obsolete senses retain a troublesome and ghostly presence within present-day usage, and are likely to materialise just when we thought it was safe to use them. Thus, a seemingly innocent word like guest , is etymologically cognate with hostis , which means an enemy or a stranger, thereby inadvertently manifesting the always potentially unwelcome status of the guest., the long-dormant metaphorical bases of words are often reactiviated by their use in philosophy or literature and then interfere with literal sense, or with the stating of single meanings. Linguistic anxiety, then, is a keynote of the post-structuralist outlook.
. Project. Here project means the fundamental aims of each movement, what it is they want to persuade us of. Structuralism, firstly, questions our way of structuring and categorising reality, and prompts us to break free of habitual modes of perception or categorisation, but it believes that we can thereby attain a more reliable view of things.structuralism is much more fundamental: it distrusts the very notion of reason, and the idea of ​​the human being as an independent entity, preferring the notion of the dissolved or constructed subject, whereby what we may think of as the individual is really a product of social and linguistic forces - that is, not an essence at all, merely a tissue of textualities . Thus, its torch of scepticism burns away the intellectual ground on which the Western civilisation is built., We can draw a conclusion that post-structuralism is a late 20 th century movement in philosophy and literary criticism, which generally defines itself in its opposition to structuralism. Post-structuralism emerged in France during the 1960s, a period of political disorder, rebellions and disappointment with traditional values, accompanied by a revival of interest in feminism, Western Marxism, phenomenology and nihilism. Two main figures in the early post-structuralist movement were Jacques Derrida and Roland Barthes.
