assemblage
definition
characteristics
a contingent mix of practices and things, where this contingent ensemble of physical and non-phycical objects -broadly characterizable as 'semiotics' (Deleuze and Guattari, 1987: 406)
ad hoc groupings of diverse elements, of vibrant materials of all sorts (Bennett, 2010: 23)
matches posthumanism's criticism of the assumptions that entities should be seen as having stable interiors and exteriors (Wee, 2021)
consistent with posthumanism's skepticism about agency as having an identifable locus (Wee, 2021)
can be organized and ordered, but it is contingent and changeable (Wee, 2021)
the structure exists, but attributing agency to any specific member of assemblage is futile / useless (Wee, 2021)
recognizes the role of boundness in ontology, and see boundaries can be multiple, contested and shifting (Wee, 2021)
Some important notes
mixed semiotics (Deleuze and Guattari, 1987)
multiple regimes of signification
taking against a strict understanding of the autonomy of signs as constituting self-contained and sharply bounded systems
no established assemblages (Deleuze and Guattari, 1987)
there is no final point or stability
the boundaries are contingent
the imprtance of exteriority
linguistic assemblages
irregularities in regularities
using constructions
constrained by the conventionalized linguistic properties
a shared understanding
what parts of constructions are open
what parts of constructions are closed
not stable / taken for granted
speakers have their own inferences about what is open what is not
speakers from the same community can have slightly differing ideas about the pragmatic and lexicogrammatical properties of a construction
speakers assemble language in ways that reflect their own encounters with and understanding of particular constructions
shared understandings are dependent on speakers' interpretations of these constructions
interpretations change over time
leading to divergent undertandings
signs are no longer limited to linguistic entities (Bonta and Protevi 2004)
the meaning of a sign is a measure of the probablity of trigerring a particular material process
signs that trigger other signs to self-organizing
deterritorialization (Deleuze and Guattari, 1987: 174, 306)
the process by which elements of an extant assemblage dissemble and go on to form a new assemblage or ‘reterritorialize’
two kinds
relative deterritorialization
absolute deterritorialization
the self-organization follows the patterns that have already been conventionalized
the self-organization exhibits the system’s ‘capacity for selftransformation
there is no language in its totality
language experience via particular material signs
linguistic
non-linguistic
English, Japanese, bad English
assemblage
the signs of the system / variety is assembled
we learn to assemble linguistic signs and categorize them as 'English', 'Japanese', etc.
learning through socialization within
speech practices
language ideologies of communities
langauge as an autonomous system
there is no totality in language
language is an ongoing project
different bits added
others removed
we never encounter the complete collection of signs
as the components of the collection change, so too does the assemblage.
no reason why we
should all share exactly the same understanding of the linguistic assemblage
since different individuals likely to have different collections of signs in mind and the same individual may even have different collections of signs in mind at different times
the implication of assemblage and mixed semiotics
question to the ontology of langauge
why should be limited to words?
why should we exclude mode of communication (phone, blog, etc)
the materiality of language
there is no linguistic constant
the product of activity, human and non-human
changes to language => the results of chaning activities
a uniform and invariant way in which language exists