Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T16:41:23.618Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

13 - Structuralism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 December 2020

By
Sandro Segre
Edited by
Peter Kivisto
Peter Kivisto
Affiliation:
Augustana College, Illinois
Get access

Summary

As a theoretical perspective, structuralism focuses on the notion of structure. This notion can be defined in two distinct ways. The intentional definition directs attention to a system of empirically observable relations among the members of a given collectivity, as indicated by their roles and social positions. The effective definition conceives of structure as a set of interrelated but not visible elements, the study of which calls for a special method of inquiry. This method has been applied to anthropology, linguistics, literature, and psychology. Radcliffe Brown, Merton, Lipset, Coleman, and Blau are among the foremost representatives of structuralism intentionally defined. De Saussure, Lévi-Strauss, Barthes, and Althusser, among others, represent structuralism effectively defined.

Sandro Segre is a retired professor of sociology and sociological theory, which he taught at the University of Genoa. Some of his recent publications include Bauman, Elias, and Latour on Modernity and Its Alternatives (2020), Business and Financial Markets: A Weberian Analysis (2016), Contemporary Sociological Thinkers and Theories (2014), Introduction to Habermas (2012), and Talcott Parsons: An Introduction (2012).

Keywords

Effective definitionintentional definitionrolessocial positionsstructuralismstructure
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Social Theory , pp. 250 - 271
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Althusser, L. 1995 [1965]. Pour Marx. Paris: La Découverte.Google Scholar
Althusser, Louis, Balibar, Étienne, Rancière, Jacques, Establet, Roger, and Macherey, Pierre. 1996 [1965]. Lire le capital. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
Balibar, E. 1995. “Avant-propos pour la réedition de 1996.” In Althusser (ed.), L., Pour Marx (pp. i–xiv). Paris: La Découverte.Google Scholar
Barthes, R. 1964. Essais Critiques. Paris: Editions du Seuil.Google Scholar
Barthes, R. 1968. Elements of Semiology. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.Google Scholar
Barthes, R. 1974. S/Z. An Essay. New York: Hill and Wang.Google Scholar
Barthes, R. 1975. Barthes par Roland Barthes. Paris: Editions du Seuil.Google Scholar
Barthes, R. 1977. Writing Degree Zero. New York: Hill and Wang.Google Scholar
Barthes, R. 1978. A Lover’s Discourse. Fragments. New York: Hill and Wang.Google Scholar
Barthes, R. 1981. Camera Lucida. New York: Hill and Wang.Google Scholar
Barthes, R. 1982. The Empire of Signs. New York: Hill and Wang.Google Scholar
Barthes, R. 1983. The Fashion System. New York: Hill and Wang.Google Scholar
Barthes, R. 1986. The Rustle of Language. New York: Hill and Wang.Google Scholar
Barthes, R. 2012. Mythologies. New York: Hill and Wang.Google Scholar
Bastide, R. 1972 [1962]. Introduction à l’étude du mot structure. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Blau, P. M. 1964. Exchange and Power in Social Life. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Blau, P. M. 1974. “Presidential Address: Parameters of Social Structure.” American Sociological Review 39: 615–635.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blau, P. M. 1976a. “Introduction: Parallels and Contrasts in Structural Inquiries.” In Blau, P. M. (ed.), Approaches to the Study of Social Structure (pp. 1–20). London: Open Books.Google Scholar
Blau, P. M. 1976b. “Parameters of Social Structure.” In Blau, P. M. (ed.), Approaches to the Study of Social Structure (pp. 210–219). London: Open Books.Google Scholar
Blau, P. M. 1977. Inequality and Heterogeneity: A Primitive Theory of Social Structure. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Blau, P. M. 1981. “Diverse Views of Social Structure and Their Common Denominator.” In Blau, P. M. and Merton, R. K. (eds.), Continuities in Structural Inquiry (pp. 1–23). London: Sage.Google Scholar
Blau, P. M. 1982. “Structural Sociology and Network Analysis: An Overview.” In Marsden, P. V. and Lin, N. (eds.), Social Structure and Network Analysis (pp. 273–279). London: Sage.Google Scholar
Blau, P. M. 1987. “Contrasting Theoretical Perspectives.” In Alexander, J. C., Giesen, B., Münch, R., and Smelser, N. J. (eds.), The Micro-Macro Link (pp. 71–85). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Blau, P. M. 1994. Structural Contexts of Opportunities. Chicago, IL, London: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Blau, P. M. 2012. “Structural Constraints of Status Complements.” In Coser, L. A. (ed.), The Idea of Social Structure. Papers in Honor of Robert K. Merton (pp. 117–138). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.Google Scholar
Bonomi, A. 1968. “Lo strutturalismo di Jean Piaget.” In Piaget, J. (ed.), Lo strutturalismo (pp. 3–17). Milan: Il Saggiatore.Google Scholar
Boudon, R. 1968. A quoi sert la notion de structure? Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Calhoun, Craig, Meyer, Marshall W., and Scott, W. Richard (eds.). 1990. Structures of Power and Constraint: Papers in Honor of Peter M. Blau. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Calhoun, C., and Scott, W. R. 1990. “Introduction: Peter Blau’s Sociological Structuralism.” In Calhoun, C., Meyer, M. W., and Scott, W. R. (eds.), Structures of Power and Constraint: Papers in Honor or Peter M. Blau (pp. 1–36). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dreyfus, H., and Rabinow, P.. 1983. Michel Foucault: Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Eco, U. 2015. La struttura assente. Milan: Bompiani.Google Scholar
Ehrmann, J. 1966a. “Introduction.” In Ehrmann, J. (ed.), Structuralism (pp. vii-xiii). New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
Ehrmann, J. 1966b. “Structures of Exchange in Cinna.” In Ehrmann, J. (ed.), Structuralism (pp. 159–188). New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
Flynn, T. 2003. “Foucault’s Mapping of History.” In Gutting, G. (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Foucault (pp. 29–48). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Foucault, M. 1963. Naissance de la clinique. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
Foucault, M. 1966. Les mots et les choses. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Foucault, M. 1969. L’archéologie du savoir. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Foucault, M. 1972 [1961]. Histoire de la folie à l’âge classique. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Foucault, M. 1998. The Will to Knowledge. Volume 1 of The History of Sexuality. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
Giddens, A. 1981. A Contemporary Critique of Historical Materialism. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Giddens, A. 1984. The Constitution of Society. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Godelier, M. 1970. “System, Structure and Contradiction in Das Kapital.” In Lane, M. (ed.), Introduction to Structuralism (pp. 340–358). New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Godelier, M. 1982. “The Problem of the Reproduction of Socioeconomic Systems.” In Rossi, I. (ed.), Structural Sociology (pp. 259–291). New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Gutting, G. 2005. Foucault: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Heydebrand, W. 1981. “Marxist Structuralism.” In Blau, P. M. and Merton, R. K. (eds.), Continuities in Structural Inquiry (pp. 81–119). London: Sage.Google Scholar
Homans, G. C. 1976. “What Do We Mean by Social Structure?” In Blau, P. M. (ed.), Approaches to the Study of Social Structure (pp. 53–63). London: Open Books.Google Scholar
Jakobson, R. 1965. “Vers une science de l’art poétique.” In Todorov, T. (ed.), Théorie de la literature (pp. 9–13). Paris: Editions du Seuil.Google Scholar
Jakobson, R. 1970. “On Russian Fairy Tales.” In Lane, M. (ed.), Introduction to Structuralism (pp. 184–201). New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Jakobson, R. 1972. “Linguistics and Poetics.” In DeGeorge, R. and DeGeorge, F. (eds.), The Structuralists from Marx to Lévi-Strauss (pp. 84–123). Garden City, NY: Doubleday Anchor.Google Scholar
Jakobson, R. 1985. “Verbal Communication.” In Selected Writings (pp. 82–92). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Jakobson, R., and Halle., M. 1956. Fundamentals of Language. The Hague: Mouton Publishers.Google Scholar
Kurzweil, E. 1980. The Age of Structuralism. Lévi-Strauss to Foucault. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Lacan, J. 1970. “The Insistence of the Letter in the Unconscious.” In Ehrmann, J. (ed.), Structuralism (pp. 101–137). New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
Lacan, J. 1972. “Of Structure as an Inmixing of an Otherness Prerequisite to any Subject Whatsoever.” In Macksey, R. and Donato, E. (eds.), The Languages of Criticism and the Sciences of Man: The Structuralist Controversy (pp. 186–200). Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Lacan, J. 1973. Les quatre concepts fondamentaux de la psychanalyse. Paris: Éditions du Seuil.Google Scholar
Lane, M. 1970. “Introduction.” In Lane, M. (ed.), Introduction to Structuralism (pp. 11–39). New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Lavers, A. 1982. Roland Barthes. Structuralism and After. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Lefebvre, H. 1966. “Il concetto di struttura in Marx.” In Bastide, R. (ed.), Usi e significati del termine “struttura” nelle scienze umane e sociali (pp. 107–131). Milan: Bompiani.Google Scholar
Lévi-Strauss, C. 1962a. Le totemisme aujourd’hui. Paris: Presses Universitaire de France.Google Scholar
Lévi-Strauss, C. 1962b. La pensée sauvage. Paris: Plon.Google Scholar
Lévi-Strauss, C. 1963. Structural Anthropology. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Lévi-Strauss, C. 1966. “I limiti del concetto di struttura in etnologia.” In Bastide, R. (ed.), Usi e significati del termine “struttura” nelle scienze umane e sociali (pp. 37–43). Milan: Bompiani.Google Scholar
Lévi-Strauss, C. 1967 [1949]. Les structures élémentaire de la parenté. La Haye: Mouton et Co.Google Scholar
Lévi-Strauss, C. 1969. The Elementary Structures of Kinship. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Lévi-Strauss, C. 1970. “The Sex of the Heavenly Bodies.” In Lane, M. (ed.), Introduction to Structuralism (pp. 330–339). New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Lévi-Strauss, C. 1972. “The Structural Study of Myth.” In DeGeorge, R. and DeGeorge, F. (eds.), The Structuralists from Marx to Levi-Strauss (pp. 168–194). Garden City, NY: Anchor Books.Google Scholar
Lévi-Strauss, C. 1973. Structural Anthropology Volume 2. New York: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Lévi-Strauss, C. 1974. Anthropologie Structurale. Paris: Plon.Google Scholar
Lévi-Strauss, C. 1982. Tristes Tropiques. New York: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Lévi-Strauss, C. 1994. The Raw and the Cooked. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lévi-Strauss, C. 2008a. Nature, culture et société. Paris: Flammarion.Google Scholar
Lévi-Strauss, C. 2008b. Totemism. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Marrone, G. 2016. Roland Barthes: parole chiave. Rome: Carocci.Google Scholar
Martinet, A. 1966. “Structure and Language.” In Ehrmann, J. (ed.), Structuralism (pp. 1–9). New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
Merton, R. K. 1968. Social Theory and Social Structure. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Merton, R. K. 1976. “Structural Analysis in Sociology.” In Blau, P. M. (ed.), Approaches to the Study of Social Structure (pp. 21–52). London: Open Books.Google Scholar
Merton, Robert K., and Blau, Peter M. (eds.). 1981. Continuities in Structural Inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.Google Scholar
Murdock, G. P. 1949. Social Structure. New York: The Macmillan Company.Google Scholar
Nancy, J.-L., and Lacoue-Labarthe, P.. 1992. The Title of the Letter. A Reading of Lacan. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
Nadel, S. F. 2004 [1957]. The Theory of Social Structure. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Parsons, T. 2012 [1975]. “The Present Status of Structural-Functional Theory in Sociology.” In Coser, L. A. (ed.), The Idea of Social Structure (pp. 67–83). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
Pettit, P. 1975. The Concept of Structuralism: A Critical Analysis. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Piaget, J. 1968. Le structuralisme. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
Propp, V. 1968. Morphology of the Folktale. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Radcliffe-Brown, A. R. 1952. Structure and Function in Primitive Society. London: Cohen & West.Google Scholar
Resch, R. P. 1992. Althusser and the Renewal of Marxist Social Theory. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Resch, R. P. 2005. “Jacques Lacan.” In Ritzer, George (ed.), Encyclopedia of Social Theory, vol. 1 (pp. 428–433). London: Sage.Google Scholar
Riffaterre, M. 1966. “Describing Poetic Structures: Two Approaches to Baudelaire’s Les Chats.” In Ehrmann, J. (ed.), Structuralism (pp. 188–230). New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
Rossi, I. 1982. “Relational Structure as an Alternative to the Structural and Interpretive Paradigms of Empiricist Orientation.” In Rossi, I. (ed.), Structural Sociology (pp. 3–21). New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Runciman, W. G. 1969. “What Is Structuralism?” British Journal of Sociology 20(3): 253–265.Google Scholar
Saussure, F. de 1966. Course in General Linguistics. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Saussure, F. de 2016 [1916]. Cours de linguistique général. Paris: Payot.Google Scholar
Stinchcombe, A. L. 2012 [1975]. “Merton’s Theory of Social Structure.” In Coser, L. A. (ed.), The Idea of Social Structure (pp. 11–33). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
Sztompka, P. 1990. “R. K. Merton’s Theoretical System: An Overview.” In Clark, J., Modgil, C., and Modgil, S. (eds.), Robert K. Merton. Consensus and Controversy (pp. 53–66). London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
Todorov, T. 1965. “Présentation.” In Todorov, T. (ed.), Théorie de la literature (pp. 15–27). Paris: Editions du Seuil.Google Scholar
Todorov, T. 1968. Poétique. Paris: Editions du Seuil.Google Scholar
Todorov, T. 1972. “The Structural Analysis of Literature: The Tales of Henry James.” In Robey, D. (ed.), Structuralism: An Introduction (pp. 73–103). Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Wells, R. S. 1970. “De Saussure’s System of Linguistics.” In Lane, M. (ed.), Introduction to Structuralism (pp. 85–123). New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

  • Structuralism
  • Edited by Peter Kivisto, Augustana College, Illinois
  • Book: The Cambridge Handbook of Social Theory
  • Online publication: 03 December 2020
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316677445.014
Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

  • Structuralism
  • Edited by Peter Kivisto, Augustana College, Illinois
  • Book: The Cambridge Handbook of Social Theory
  • Online publication: 03 December 2020
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316677445.014
Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

  • Structuralism
  • Edited by Peter Kivisto, Augustana College, Illinois
  • Book: The Cambridge Handbook of Social Theory
  • Online publication: 03 December 2020
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316677445.014
Available formats
×