After re-reading a small section in the text I can see how the quote "meaning is in not in 'words', or in the 'people,' but in the 'network'" makes sense. I say this because we learned that words don't mean the same for everybody and then they go on to say that meaning is in the people. But, in some sense there is some meaning in people and in words. Here is some helpful backround information on important models and people we have used before we have gotten to talking about meaning in the network.
It is important to reiterate what Courtney
said in her post about what source means for both Shannon and Weaver. She writes that "Shannon and Weaver, "source" is all things possible that can be constructed plus the statistical probability of how and when they are uses. Sources always change." Roman Jakobson on the other hand refers to "source" as "code." If you go to this website Roman Jakobson
you can learn that Jakobson was a Russian linguist who did alot of work on the functions of language. He also goes on to say that "there is not one code there are various codes and these codes are composed of various 'subcodes'." These subcodes can be considerred as dialects or text messages. An example of a subcode could be if my sister and I had a certain language that we only knew and nobody understood except for us. To understand the language you have to know it.
A very good point made by Danielle
was that "networks are also made up of signs, signs being the signified and the signifier. The signifier is a symbol and the signified is the meaning behind that symbol. As Saussure argued, you can’t fully understand a sign without the context that it lives in." All of this is important to understand why the meaning is in the network.
We already know that the problem with the Shannon & Weaver model was that it didn't show us what things meant. With Saussure came new ideas of signifier and signified and more of importance on meaning by designating the signified to represent the concept and the signifier representing a sound image. With Jakobson we learned the importance of subcodes.
We have learned that the source is the "ensembles of all possible messages, the probabilities that predict occurences in actual communication." We have also learned that the "source is abstract" and that "the network is the source embodied by real people in a social system and that when we communicate we share our "knowledges of the source to share meaning, and changing the statistical properties of the source as they do."
Dave has told us that the reason why meaning is in the network is because the way we learn our language is from our "exposure to a variety of people and messages in a particular social space,"and "as participants in that social life, we are part of the network, and that is where the meaning lies." By this he means your personal experience or your culture has an effect on how we interpet language and that when we are communicating we are part of a network.
I think an example of this could be using the signifer "father." Most people would just look at this word from their own experience and assume the signified would be a parent, but, in this case it's not the only signified. Another signified of father is a religious figure. An example of putting this in a situation could be say you were to have a foreign friend that didn't know anything about religious figures at all and came to church with you and your family and as you were leaving and you said "Bye Father." The friend might get confused and think that you are saying bye to your Dad because she may not know that father also has a sub-code as a religious figure/term. Father isn't just a parental figure it is also the title of a priest(ex. Father Mc Carthy). Father is a signifier with many signifieds depending on your culture and your experience is how you interpret it.
The idea we get from Derrida
is that " to 'deconstruct' is to take an idea, institution or value and understand its mechanisms by removing the cement that makes it up," Which in this case would be looking at all of things in the network seperately including things like signifier and signified or the source and message being sent in the S & W Model.