Understanding Meaning Across Texts and Cultures.
Julia Kristeva: Intertextuality and Semiotics
In this article, I want to explore Julia Kristeva’s ideas of intertextuality and the semiotic, two concepts that have transformed the way we think about language and meaning. Kristeva, a French-Bulgarian philosopher, linguist, and semiotician, argued that meaning doesn’t arise in isolation. Instead, it emerges through the connections between texts, discourses, and cultural practices.
This shift from focusing on individual utterances to a broader cultural context reshaped both linguistics and philosophy of language. For linguists, it raised questions about how language functions in a web of cultural meaning. For philosophers, it challenged traditional notions of meaning as static and self-contained.
What Is Intertextuality?
Intertextuality refers to the idea that every text is shaped by other texts. Kristeva, drawing on the work of Mikhail Bakhtin, introduced this term in the 1960s. She proposed that any act of communication — whether a novel, a poem, or a political speech — exists in dialogue with earlier texts. For example:
Shakespeare’s influence on modern literature: Writers often borrow themes, phrases, or plots from his works.
Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World (1932) title itself is taken from Miranda’s line in The Tempest: “O brave new world, That has such people in’t!” Huxley repurposes this phrase ironically, contrasting Miranda’s naive optimism with the dystopian reality of his novel’s society. This intertextual link enriches the novel’s themes, showing how Shakespeare’s works continue to shape modern literature.
Popular music lyrics referencing past songs: A pop hit might echo lyrics or melodies from earlier genres, creating layers of meaning for its audience.
A clear example is Madonna’s Material Girl (1984), which echoes the style and theme of Marilyn Monroe’s performance of Diamonds Are a Girl’s Best Friend from the film Gentlemen Prefer Blondes (1953). Madonna’s song not only borrows the glamorous, tongue-in-cheek attitude but also visually references Monroe’s iconic pink dress and choreography in its music video, creating intertextual layers that play on themes of materialism and femininity.
In linguistics, intertextuality is important because it helps us understand that language is inherently social. Words and phrases carry echoes of their past uses, shaping how we interpret them.
The Semiotic and the Symbolic
Kristeva’s concept of the semiotic and symbolic modes of language complements intertextuality. She divided language into two interacting dimensions:
The Semiotic: Pre-verbal, affective, and tied to rhythm and emotion. This mode is associated with the mother-child bond and the physicality of sound.
A simple example of the semiotic mode is a baby’s cooing or babbling. These sounds, while not yet structured into words, convey emotions like contentment or excitement through rhythm, intonation, and pitch. They reflect the pre-verbal, affective nature of communication and form the foundation for the later development of symbolic language.
The Symbolic: Structured, rule-governed, and tied to syntax, grammar, and logic. This mode represents societal norms and rational thought.
Think of a formal written contract. The language in the contract follows strict grammatical rules, precise syntax, and logical structure to clearly outline obligations and expectations. For instance, a clause like “The tenant shall pay rent on the first day of each month” adheres to societal norms of legal language, ensuring clarity and enforceability. This structured use of language represents the symbolic’s focus on rationality and order.
For linguists, the interplay between these dimensions explains how language can express both emotion and rationality. Poetry, for instance, often blends the semiotic’s rhythm with the symbolic’s structure to convey deep meaning.
Why Intertextuality Matters
Intertextuality shifts our focus from individual utterances to cultural meaning. In doing so, it enriches the study of language by:
Highlighting cultural embeddedness: Every act of speech or writing is shaped by cultural norms, histories, and values.
Cultural embeddedness means that language reflects the unique norms, histories, and values of the society in which it is used. For example, the phrase the American Dream carries cultural significance in the United States, encapsulating values like individualism, opportunity, and success. However, the same phrase might not resonate in cultures where communal goals or different historical contexts dominate. This demonstrates how language both shapes and is shaped by the culture it emerges from, influencing how messages are understood and interpreted.
Encouraging interdisciplinary approaches: Linguists can draw from literature, history, and anthropology to better understand language as a cultural phenomenon.
Interdisciplinary approaches allow linguists to explore language beyond its structural elements by connecting it with other fields. For instance, analysing Chinua Achebe’s novel Things Fall Apart from a linguistic and anthropological perspective reveals how colonial language policies affected Igbo cultural identity. By incorporating insights from history, literature, and anthropology, linguists gain a richer understanding of how language operates within and shapes human experiences, from storytelling to social power dynamics.
Tis intertextuality approach also broadens the scope of applied linguistics, helping us analyse media, advertising, and political rhetoric. For example, slogans in advertising often rely on intertextuality, evoking popular culture to connect with audiences emotionally.
A Linguistic Perspective on Kristeva
While Kristeva’s work often leans toward philosophy, it remains deeply rooted in linguistics. Her analysis of poetic language, for instance, demonstrates how the semiotic disrupts the symbolic, opening space for new interpretations. Similarly, her focus on cultural texts aligns with the study of discourse and sociolinguistics.
As linguists, we can use Kristeva’s theories to study:
Language change: How new meanings emerge from reinterpreting old texts.
Language change often occurs when old texts are reinterpreted in new contexts, leading to shifts in meaning. For example, the term Orwellian, originally tied to George Orwell’s dystopian novel 1984, has evolved to describe modern concerns about surveillance and authoritarianism. This reinterpretation reflects how language adapts to cultural and historical shifts, with new meanings emerging from the ongoing dialogue between past and present texts.
Discourse analysis: How political or media narratives borrow and transform earlier discourses.
Discourse analysis applies intertextuality and examines how political or media narratives borrow and reshape earlier discourses to serve new purposes. For instance, the phrase Yes We Can from Barack Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign echoes earlier civil rights and labour movement slogans, transforming their messages of collective empowerment into a contemporary call for political change. This borrowing and recontextualisation demonstrate how discourse evolves, building on past meanings to resonate with current audiences.
This article has shown that Julia Kristeva’s concepts of intertextuality and the semiotic deepen our understanding of language as a cultural phenomenon, where meaning is shaped not only by individual utterances but also by the broader web of social and historical contexts. This perspective highlights the intricate interplay between language and society, bridging the gap between linguistic structure and cultural interaction.
This focus on how language operates within social frameworks leads me naturally to the next topic: Politeness and Face: Pragmatics Meets Social Interaction. If intertextuality examines how meaning emerges from connections between texts, politeness and face explore how meaning and intent are negotiated in real-time social interactions. I’ll examine how individuals use language to manage relationships, maintain harmony, and navigate the delicate dynamics of respect and identity in conversation.
©Antoine Decressac — 2025.
As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases.
Reading List: Understanding Intertextuality and the Semiotic
Julia Kristeva — Revolution in Poetic Language (2024)
Synopsis: This foundational text introduces Kristeva’s theories of intertextuality, the semiotic, and the symbolic. Although dense, it offers essential insights into her linguistic and semiotic framework. For those new to her work, focusing on the sections addressing poetic language and its cultural implications will be most accessible.Graham Allen — Intertextuality (2nd Edition, 2021)
Synopsis: Allen provides a clear and accessible introduction to the concept of intertextuality, tracing its development from Kristeva to contemporary applications in literature, media, and cultural studies. Written for a general audience, this book is an excellent starting point for those exploring how texts relate and shape meaning in broader cultural contexts.Mary Orr — Intertextuality: Debates and Contexts (2019)
Synopsis: Orr expands on Kristeva’s ideas by contextualising intertextuality within modern cultural and media landscapes. She explores how the concept operates across disciplines, making the book suitable for readers curious about how intertextuality influences everyday language, advertising, and digital communication.Meghan Vicks — Narratives of Nothing in 20th-Century Literature (2015)
Synopsis: Though not solely about intertextuality, this book investigates the interplay of texts within the cultural and literary canon, showing how ‘nothingness’ is constructed through textual references. It offers a unique, approachable lens on how Kristeva’s theories of the semiotic and symbolic can enrich literary analysis.