Which view holds that the relationship between a word and what it denotes is merely conventional?

• A. Interactionist
• B. Structuralist
• C. Transformationalists
• D. Second language

Answer: (B)

The key idea here is that the bond between a word and what it stands for is a matter of convention among speakers. In the structuralist view, a linguistic sign has two parts: the signifier (the sound or written form) and the signified (the concept). That link is not determined by any natural resemblance or inherent connection to reality; it’s established by social agreement within a language community. Because different languages assign different sounds to the same concept, the connection is clearly conventional, not intrinsic. Meaning, then, arises from the system of differences and relationships in the language, rather than from a direct, natural link to the world. An interactionist perspective would stress how language use in social contexts shapes meaning, rather than the arbitrary nature of signs; transformationalist theories focus on how deep structures map to surface forms; and the notion of “second language” isn’t a theory about how signs relate to meanings.