General linguistics is the study of both language as defining capability of the human species, and languages as the historical and social manifestations of this capability. My Chair in Linguistic Theory at the Collège de France, which I have held since 1989, illustrates this polarity. In effect, at one end one finds language, studied from the perspective of child acquisition, as based upon innate capabilities supplemented by contributions from the social environment, at the other end one finds languages, studied in their diversity. This diversity is highlighted through typological studies, which seek to establish language types in the areas of phonology, morpho syntax and semantics. Typological categories may or may not coincide with genetic relationships, namely the grouping of the diverse human languages into one or another of the large families: Indo-European, Semitic, Uralic, Altaic, Bantu, Caucasian, Amerindian, Sino Tibetan, Austronesian, etc. The symbolic content of languages depends on their powers of identification, in other words the image they give of the diverse nations. The attachment of the latter to their languages is often very powerful and may be a source of conflict.

Over the last four years, my courses at the Collège de France have focused on the following four themes. In 1999-2000, I attempted to define what a realistic vision of language phenomena could be, through the study of the role played by the context in the definition of categories, and through the revision of the opposition between associative and syntagmatic relations. In 2000-2001, I examined six different aspects of how inter-individual and social relations are reflected in linguistic utterances: the illusion of syntactic autonomy, morphosyntax as dependant on semantic phenomena, morphosyntax as dependant on pragmatic phenomena, the dialogal relation as sole domain where certain morphemes are used; the extinction of languages; and lastly, dyshyponoesis, the outline of a hypothesis concerning the neurological bases of pragmatic commands in language phenomena. 2001-2002 was devoted to the introduction of a linguistic study of affects: after having defined the object of my study, I presented the expression of affects in daily conversation; I then questioned whether languages have structures exclusively assigned to the expression of affective utterances. In continuation of this study, 2002-2003 was devoted to a typological essay on affects: after defining the field, I, in turn, studied the cases of affect specific markings and the lack thereof.