Langue and parole: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
add link |
m oxford |
||
| (26 intermediate revisions by 13 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{short description|Two terms of Saussure}} |
|||
{{DISPLAYTITLE:''Langue'' and ''parole''}} |
{{DISPLAYTITLE:''Langue'' and ''parole''}} |
||
'''''Langue''''' '''and''' '''''parole''''' is a [[Theory of language|theoretical linguistic]] dichotomy distinguished by [[Ferdinand de Saussure]] in his ''[[Course in General Linguistics]]''.<ref name="Saussure_1959" /> |
|||
'''''Langue''''' ([[French language|French]], meaning "[[Language|(an individual) language]]"<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.larousse.fr/dictionnaires/francais/langue/46180 |title=Langue |last= |first= |date= |website=Larousse Dictionnaire français |publisher=Larousse |access-date=2020-05-20 |quote=Système de signes vocaux, éventuellement graphiques, propre à une communauté d'individus, qui l'utilisent pour s'exprimer et communiquer entre eux : La langue française, anglaise.}}</ref>) and '''''parole''''' (meaning "[[speech]]") is a [[Theory of language|theoretical linguistic]] dichotomy distinguished by [[Ferdinand de Saussure]] in his ''[[Course in General Linguistics]]''. ''Langue'' encompasses the abstract, systematic rules and conventions of a [[Semiotic|signifying]] system; it is independent of, and pre-exists, the individual user. It involves the principles of language, without which no meaningful utterance, "parole", would be possible. ''Parole'' refers to the concrete instances of the use of ''langue'', including texts which provide the ordinary research material for [[linguistics]].<ref name="Saussure_1959">{{cite book |last=de Saussure|first=Ferdinand | |title=Course in general linguistics |place=New York|publisher=Philosophy Library |date=1959 |orig-year=First published 1916|pages=|url=https://monoskop.org/images/0/0b/Saussure_Ferdinand_de_Course_in_General_Linguistics_1959.pdf |isbn= 9780231157278|author-link=Ferdinand_de_Saussure}}</ref> |
|||
The French term ''langue'' ('[an individual] [[language]]')<ref>{{cite web|title=Langue|url=https://www.larousse.fr/dictionnaires/francais/langue/46180|access-date=2020-05-20|website=Larousse Dictionnaire français|publisher=Larousse|quote=Système de signes vocaux, éventuellement graphiques, propre à une communauté d'individus, qui l'utilisent pour s'exprimer et communiquer entre eux : La langue française, anglaise.}}</ref> encompasses the abstract, systematic rules and conventions of a [[Semiotic|signifying]] system; it is independent of, and pre-exists, the individual user. It involves the principles of language, without which no meaningful utterance, or ''parole'', would be possible. |
|||
| ⚫ | |||
In contrast, ''parole'' ('[[speech]]') refers to the concrete instances of the use of ''langue'', including texts which provide the ordinary research material for [[linguistics]].<ref name="Saussure_1959">{{cite book|last=de Saussure|first=Ferdinand|url=https://monoskop.org/images/0/0b/Saussure_Ferdinand_de_Course_in_General_Linguistics_1959.pdf|title=Course in general linguistics|date=1959|publisher=Philosophy Library|isbn=9780231157278|place=New York|author-link=Ferdinand_de_Saussure|orig-year=1916}}</ref> |
|||
Langue and parole are concepts belonging to an argument made by Saussure for the autonomy of [[linguistics]] as a scientific discipline. Saussure declares language to be a [[social fact]], relating it to [[Cultural anthropology|cultural]] and [[social sciences]]. In this, he is opposed to 19th century European views, which remain dominant in America, that the study of language is a sub-field of [[psychology]] or [[biology]]. This is part of a [[Structuralism|structuralist]] programme initiated in [[sociology]] by [[Émile Durkheim]].<ref name="Hejl 2013">{{cite book |last=Hejl |first=P. M. |editor-last=Maasen |editor-first=Sabine |editor2-last=Mendelsohn |editor2-first=E. |editor3-last=Weingart |editor3-first=P. | title=Biology as Society, Society as Biology: Metaphors |publisher=Springer |date=2013 |pages=155–191 |chapter=The importance of the concepts of "organism" and "evolution" in Emile Durkheim's division of social labor and the influence of Herbert Spencer |isbn=9789401106733}}</ref> |
|||
| ⚫ | |||
| ⚫ | [[Structural linguistics]], as proposed by Saussure, assumes a |
||
| ⚫ | [[Structural linguistics]], as proposed by Saussure, assumes a non-biological standpoint of culture within the [[Nature versus nurture|nature–nurture divide]]. Langue and parole make up two thirds of Saussure's '''speech circuit''' (French: ''circuit de la parole''); the third part being the '''brain''', where the individual's knowledge of language is located. The ''speech circuit'' is a [[feedback loop]] between the individual speakers of a given language. It is an interactive phenomenon: knowledge of language arises from language usage, and language usage arises from knowledge of language. Saussure, however, argues that the true locus of language is neither in the verbal behaviour (''parole'') nor in the mind of the speakers, but is situated in the loop between speech and the individual, existing as such nowhere else but only as a social phenomenon within the speech community.<ref name="Saussure_1959" /> |
||
| ⚫ | |||
| ⚫ | |||
| ⚫ | * |
||
| ⚫ | * |
||
| ⚫ | |||
| ⚫ | |||
| ⚫ | |||
| ⚫ | * the study of [[evolutionary psychology]] or the [[Biology|biological]] research of living [[organism]]s as claimed by [[Charles Darwin]]<ref name="Darwin_1871">{{cite book |last=Darwin|first=Charles |title=The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex|publisher=Princeton University Press |year=1981 |orig-year=1871 |pages=59–61 | url=https://teoriaevolutiva.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/darwin-c-the-descent-of-man-and-selection-in-relation-to-sex.pdf | access-date=2020-03-03 |isbn=0-691-08278-2}}</ref> and the [[Evolutionary linguistics|evolutionary linguists]]<ref name="Aronoff_2017">{{cite book |last=Aronoff|first=Mark |editor-last1=Bowern | editor-last2=Horn | editor-last3=Zanuttini |title=On Looking into Words (and Beyond): Structures, Relations, Analyses|publisher=SUNY Press |year=2017|pages=443–456 |chapter=Darwinism tested by the science of language | url=https://langsci-press.org/catalog/book/151| access-date=2020-03-03 |isbn= 978-3-946234-92-0}}</ref> (which would later include 'usage-based linguistics' which also argues for a feedback loop between the speakers, but without the emergent ''langue'' phenomenon).<ref name="Bybee&Beckner_2015">{{cite book|last1=Bybee|first1=Joan L.|title=The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Analysis|last2=Beckner|first2=Clay|date=2015|publisher=Oxford University Press|editor-last1=Heine|editor-first1=Bernd|pages=953–980|chapter=Usage-Based theory|doi=10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199544004.013.0032|editor-last2=Narrog|editor-first2=Heiko}}</ref> |
||
| ⚫ | |||
| ⚫ | |||
Saussure did not concern himself overly with ''parole''; however, the structure of ''langue'' is revealed through the study of ''parole''. The distinction is similar to that made about language by [[Wilhelm von Humboldt]], between ''energeia'' (active doing) and ''ergon'' (the product of that doing)<ref>"Language as a finished product, a set of tools forged for future use, is in fact a precipitate of the ongoing activity. It is created in speech, and is in fact being continuously recreated, extended, altered, reshaped. This Humboltdian notion is the basis for another famous contribution of Saussure, his distinction between ''langue'' and ''parole''." Charles Taylor, ''The Importance of Herder'', "Philosophical Arguments" (Harvard University Press, 1997), 97.</ref>, as well as the distinction between ''language'' and ''speech'' made by [[Jan Baudouin de Courtenay]].<ref>Baudouin de Courtenay (1876–7), ''A detailed programme of lectures for the academic year 1876-77'', p. 115.</ref> Saussure drew an analogy to chess to explain the concept of ''langue'' and ''parole''. He compared ''langue'' to the [[rules of chess]]—the norms for playing the game—and compared the moves that an individual chooses to make—the individual's preferences in playing the game—to the ''parole''. The rules of the game – or language – are systematised and solidified in each [[Synchrony and diachrony|historical]] stage. Languages change diachronically, but the previous historical stages are irrelevant to the language users. What is essential is that the current norms must always support a coherent functional system. |
|||
== |
==Meaning of the terms== |
||
===Langue=== |
===Langue=== |
||
[[French language|French]] has two words corresponding to the English word ''language'':<ref>{{cite web|title=Langue|url=https://www.larousse.fr/encyclopedie/divers/langage/64596|access-date=2020-05-20|website=Larousse Dictionnaire français|publisher=Larousse|quote=Système de signes vocaux, éventuellement graphiques, propre à une communauté d'individus, qui l'utilisent pour s'exprimer et communiquer entre eux : La langue française, anglaise.}}</ref> |
|||
When translated from the [[French language|French]] term ''langue'' can mean language, or more specifically in this context, it can mean "tongue" as in "mother tongue", since language would more specifically be translated as ''langage'' in French. However, it is known Saussure intended the term to mean internal, arrangement and relationship of rules understood by a social group, however, rarely thought of in everyday life. ''Langue'' is believed to be a universal structure and, while it may have variations as seen in foreign languages, it follows a set of principal linguistic patterns. |
|||
# ''langue'', which is primarily used to refer to individual languages such as French and English; and |
|||
# ''langage'', which primarily refers to language as a general phenomenon, or to the human ability to have language. |
|||
''Langue'' therefore corresponds to the common meaning of ''language'', and the pair ''langue versus parole'' is properly expressed in English as 'language versus speech',<ref name="Saussure_1959" /> so long as ''language'' is not to be taken in [[evolution]]ary terms, but as a description of an (ultimately lifeless) immaterial sign system. The Saussurean term is not, for example, compatible with the concepts of [[language organ]], [[Universal Grammar]], or [[linguistic competence]] from the [[Noam Chomsky|Chomskyan]] frame of reference. Instead, it is the concept of any language as a semiological system, a social fact, and a system of linguistic norms. |
|||
===Parole=== |
===Parole=== |
||
''Parole'' |
''Parole'', in typical translation, means 'speech'. Saussure, on the other hand, intended for it to mean both the written and spoken language as experienced in everyday life; it is the precise utterances and use of ''langue''. Therefore, ''parole'', unlike ''langue'', is as diverse and varied as the number of people who share a language and the number of utterances and attempts to use that language. |
||
| ⚫ | |||
==As a function== |
|||
From a [[formal linguistics]] perspective, Saussure's concept of language and speech can be thought of as corresponding, respectively, to a [[formal language]] and the [[sentence (linguistics)|sentence]]s it generates. De Saussure argued before ''[[Course in General Linguistics]]'' that linguistic expressions might be algebraic.<ref name="Staal_2003">{{cite book |last1=Staal |first1=Frits|editor-last= Flood|editor-first=Gavin |title=The Blackwell Companion to Hinduism |publisher=Wiley|date=2003 |pages=348–359 |chapter=The science of language|isbn= 9780470998694 }}</ref> |
|||
The underlying basis to ''langue'' is the interpretation that it is made up of signs and not sentences. Signs are thought to have a two part aspect in that each sign relates a notion with a sound pattern (or a written symbol). A sign cannot exist as a single part for if there is a sound pattern without a notion the sound becomes only noise. Similarly, a notion cannot be communicated without a sound pattern. |
|||
The sound pattern for each notion can be extremely diverse and vice versa. For example, the notion of oneself may use the sound patterns of 'I' or 'me' while the sound pattern of 'rose' may have the notion of a flower or the past of 'rise'. The notion or sound pattern remains unchanged even if the other changes. It is by understanding the relationship of the two parts of a sign through ''langue'' that the gist of communication or ''parole'' may be understood. Without the understanding of ''langue'', ''parole'' would be meaningless sounds or symbols grouped together haphazardly. |
|||
Saussure used the example of chess to explain how ''langue'' and ''parole'' work together. ''Langue'' is the normative rules in a chess game while parole represents the individual's choice of moves. If one were to study the parole of a chess game an understanding could be derived but it would not be a universal understanding of chess. However, by studying the langue of a chess game the derived understanding may be applicable to further chess games. |
|||
Thus Saussure argued when studying language, especially a foreign language, it is more important to understand the ''langue'' than to gain a large vocabulary of ''parole'' so that sense may be made equal to that of native speaker. |
|||
Building on his insights, [[Louis Hjelmslev]] proposed in his 1943 [[Glossematics|''Prolegomena to a Theory of Language'']] a model of linguistic description and analysis based on work of mathematicians [[David Hilbert]] and [[Rudolf Carnap]] in formal language theory.<ref name="Seuren_1998">{{cite book|author=Seuren, Pieter A. M. |year=1998|title=Western linguistics: An historical introduction|publisher=Wiley-Blackwell|isbn=0-631-20891-7|pages=160–167}}</ref> The structuralist endeavor is, however, more comprehensive, ranging from the mathematical organisation of the [[semantic]] system to [[phonology]], [[morphology (linguistics)|morphology]], [[syntax]], and the whole [[discourse]] or textual arrangement. The algebraic device was considered by Hjelmslev as independent of psychology, sociology and biology.<ref name="Hjelmslev_1969">{{cite book |last=Hjelmslev|first=Louis |title=Prolegomena to a Theory of Language |publisher=University of Wisconsin Press |date=1969 |orig-year=First published 1943|isbn= 0299024709| author-link=Louis_Hjelmslev}}</ref> It is consolidated in consequent models of structural–functional linguistics including [[Systemic Functional Linguistics]].<ref name="Butler_2003">{{cite book |last=Butler|first=Christopher S. |title=Structure and Function: A Guide to Three Major Structural-Functional Theories, part 1 |publisher=John Benjamins |date=2003 |pages=121–124 | url=https://edisciplinas.usp.br/pluginfile.php/270688/mod_folder/content/0/v.%20e%20vi.%20Butler%20-%20Structure%20and%20Function.pdf?forcedownload=1 | access-date=2020-01-19 |isbn= 9781588113580}}</ref> |
|||
| ⚫ | |||
Saussure did not publish his notes in relation to linguistics and ''langue'' and ''parole''. Unfortunately Cours de linguistique générale was published after his death in 1916 (later translated into English in 1959 as ''Course in General Linguistics'') and was made up of remaining lecture notes by Saussure, course notes provided to students and notes taken by former students of his lectures he performed between 1907-1911 in Geneva. This was then published by two of his former colleagues Charles Bally and Albert Sechehaye. It was after this publication that the importance and revolutionary nature of his work truly was understood by linguists and philosophers of his time. |
|||
Reviews, commentaries and critics of both the ''Course in General Linguistics'' and original notes made by Saussure have revealed much controversy over time. One controversy is that many ideas and notions often accredited to Saussure may have been borrowed from other linguists and philosophers of the nineteenth century. Saussure's idea of language as a sign system had been proposed by other philosophers, however, he will always be known to have provided a strong, theoretical basis for a scientific approach to understanding language as a whole. |
|||
Despite this success, American advocates of the natural paradigm managed to fend off European structuralism by making its own modifications of the model. In 1946, [[Zellig Harris]] introduced [[transformational grammar|transformational generative grammar]] which excluded semantics and placed the direct object into the verb phrase, following Wundt's psychological concept, as advocated in American linguistics by [[Leonard Bloomfield]].<ref name="Seuren_1998" /> Harris's student [[Noam Chomsky]] argued for the [[cognition|cognitive]] essence of linguistic structures,<ref name="Lightfoot_2002">{{cite book |last=Lightfoot |first=David W. |year=2002 |chapter=Introduction to the second edition of Syntactic Structures by Noam Chomsky | chapter-url= https://www.academia.edu/4073170/Noam_Chomsky_Syntactic_Structure |editor-last=Lightfoot |editor-first=David W. |editor-link=David Lightfoot (linguist) |title=Syntactic Structures |edition=second |location=Berlin |publisher=Mouton de Gruyter |pages=v-xviii |isbn=3110172798|access-date=2020-02-26}}</ref> eventually giving the explanation that they were caused by a random genetic [[mutation]] in humans.<ref name="Berwick&Chomsky_2015">{{cite book |last1=Berwick|first1=Robert C. |last2=Chomsky|first2=Noam | title=Why Only Us: Language and Evolution|publisher=MIT Press |date=2015|isbn=9780262034241}}</ref> |
|||
==Influence== |
|||
Saussure's ''langue'' and ''parole'' form one of the theoretical foundations of structuralism. ''Langue'' and ''parole'' have allowed structuralists to separately examine the broad structures and formations of literature as well as the individual words. Structuralists achieved this by making a distinction within literary works between the words on a page (''parole'') and the context behind these words (''langue''). Although the reader may appear to simply be reading the words in a book their ability to understand (or possibly misunderstand) the text is a result of a person's knowledge of the ''langue'' or rules of a certain language. Similarly, ''langue'' and ''parole'' have been highly influential in the study of the signs, termed semiotics. Saussure's most notable influence on semiotics was his belief that the rules and codes of a language (''langue'') are vital in interpreting and gaining an understanding of that language system, while individual utterances (''parole'') are of little significance. This belief is echoed by Noam Chomsky's distinction between ''[[linguistic competence | competence]]'' and ''performance''. ''Langue'' and ''parole'' have also impacted the way language is taught. Since Saussure's terms have become well known, language teaching often emphasizes teaching the langue and how these rules are applied, rather than simply teaching the words of a certain language. Additionally, ''langue'' and ''parole'' have been applied to other fields of study. Anthropologist [[Claude_Lévi-Strauss|Claude Levi-Strauss]] used Structuralism and ''langue'' and ''parole'' to understand myths and tales within a broader context. In this case parole is a single tale or myth, while langue is considered the broader range of tales and myths from within a series or group. These may be myths from the same community, time period or geographical location. |
|||
==References== |
==References== |
||
Latest revision as of 18:33, 2 October 2023
Langue and parole is a theoretical linguistic dichotomy distinguished by Ferdinand de Saussure in his Course in General Linguistics.[1]
The French term langue ('[an individual] language')[2] encompasses the abstract, systematic rules and conventions of a signifying system; it is independent of, and pre-exists, the individual user. It involves the principles of language, without which no meaningful utterance, or parole, would be possible.
In contrast, parole ('speech') refers to the concrete instances of the use of langue, including texts which provide the ordinary research material for linguistics.[1]
Background and significance
[edit]Structural linguistics, as proposed by Saussure, assumes a non-biological standpoint of culture within the nature–nurture divide. Langue and parole make up two thirds of Saussure's speech circuit (French: circuit de la parole); the third part being the brain, where the individual's knowledge of language is located. The speech circuit is a feedback loop between the individual speakers of a given language. It is an interactive phenomenon: knowledge of language arises from language usage, and language usage arises from knowledge of language. Saussure, however, argues that the true locus of language is neither in the verbal behaviour (parole) nor in the mind of the speakers, but is situated in the loop between speech and the individual, existing as such nowhere else but only as a social phenomenon within the speech community.[1]
Consequently, Saussure rejects other contemporary views of language and argues for the autonomy of linguistics. According to Saussure, general linguistics is not:[1]
- the study of human mind, as thought by structural psychologists such as Wilhelm Wundt (and, later, generative and cognitive linguists).
- the study of evolutionary psychology or the biological research of living organisms as claimed by Charles Darwin[3] and the evolutionary linguists[4] (which would later include 'usage-based linguistics' which also argues for a feedback loop between the speakers, but without the emergent langue phenomenon).[5]
- an empirical discipline in the same way that natural sciences are because the true object of study has no physical substance. Saussure however argues that linguistic structures can be scientifically uncovered through text analysis.
Linguistics, then, in Saussure's conception, is properly regarded as the study of semiology, or languages as semiotic (sign) systems.
Meaning of the terms
[edit]Langue
[edit]French has two words corresponding to the English word language:[6]
- langue, which is primarily used to refer to individual languages such as French and English; and
- langage, which primarily refers to language as a general phenomenon, or to the human ability to have language.
Langue therefore corresponds to the common meaning of language, and the pair langue versus parole is properly expressed in English as 'language versus speech',[1] so long as language is not to be taken in evolutionary terms, but as a description of an (ultimately lifeless) immaterial sign system. The Saussurean term is not, for example, compatible with the concepts of language organ, Universal Grammar, or linguistic competence from the Chomskyan frame of reference. Instead, it is the concept of any language as a semiological system, a social fact, and a system of linguistic norms.
Parole
[edit]Parole, in typical translation, means 'speech'. Saussure, on the other hand, intended for it to mean both the written and spoken language as experienced in everyday life; it is the precise utterances and use of langue. Therefore, parole, unlike langue, is as diverse and varied as the number of people who share a language and the number of utterances and attempts to use that language.
Relation to formal linguistics
[edit]From a formal linguistics perspective, Saussure's concept of language and speech can be thought of as corresponding, respectively, to a formal language and the sentences it generates. De Saussure argued before Course in General Linguistics that linguistic expressions might be algebraic.[7]
Building on his insights, Louis Hjelmslev proposed in his 1943 Prolegomena to a Theory of Language a model of linguistic description and analysis based on work of mathematicians David Hilbert and Rudolf Carnap in formal language theory.[8] The structuralist endeavor is, however, more comprehensive, ranging from the mathematical organisation of the semantic system to phonology, morphology, syntax, and the whole discourse or textual arrangement. The algebraic device was considered by Hjelmslev as independent of psychology, sociology and biology.[9] It is consolidated in consequent models of structural–functional linguistics including Systemic Functional Linguistics.[10]
Despite this success, American advocates of the natural paradigm managed to fend off European structuralism by making its own modifications of the model. In 1946, Zellig Harris introduced transformational generative grammar which excluded semantics and placed the direct object into the verb phrase, following Wundt's psychological concept, as advocated in American linguistics by Leonard Bloomfield.[8] Harris's student Noam Chomsky argued for the cognitive essence of linguistic structures,[11] eventually giving the explanation that they were caused by a random genetic mutation in humans.[12]
References
[edit]- ^ a b c d e de Saussure, Ferdinand (1959) [1916]. Course in general linguistics (PDF). New York: Philosophy Library. ISBN 9780231157278.
- ^ "Langue". Larousse Dictionnaire français. Larousse. Retrieved 2020-05-20.
Système de signes vocaux, éventuellement graphiques, propre à une communauté d'individus, qui l'utilisent pour s'exprimer et communiquer entre eux : La langue française, anglaise.
- ^ Darwin, Charles (1981) [1871]. The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex (PDF). Princeton University Press. pp. 59–61. ISBN 0-691-08278-2. Retrieved 2020-03-03.
- ^ Aronoff, Mark (2017). "Darwinism tested by the science of language". In Bowern; Horn; Zanuttini (eds.). On Looking into Words (and Beyond): Structures, Relations, Analyses. SUNY Press. pp. 443–456. ISBN 978-3-946234-92-0. Retrieved 2020-03-03.
- ^ Bybee, Joan L.; Beckner, Clay (2015). "Usage-Based theory". In Heine, Bernd; Narrog, Heiko (eds.). The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Analysis. Oxford University Press. pp. 953–980. doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199544004.013.0032.
- ^ "Langue". Larousse Dictionnaire français. Larousse. Retrieved 2020-05-20.
Système de signes vocaux, éventuellement graphiques, propre à une communauté d'individus, qui l'utilisent pour s'exprimer et communiquer entre eux : La langue française, anglaise.
- ^ Staal, Frits (2003). "The science of language". In Flood, Gavin (ed.). The Blackwell Companion to Hinduism. Wiley. pp. 348–359. ISBN 9780470998694.
- ^ a b Seuren, Pieter A. M. (1998). Western linguistics: An historical introduction. Wiley-Blackwell. pp. 160–167. ISBN 0-631-20891-7.
- ^ Hjelmslev, Louis (1969) [First published 1943]. Prolegomena to a Theory of Language. University of Wisconsin Press. ISBN 0299024709.
- ^ Butler, Christopher S. (2003). Structure and Function: A Guide to Three Major Structural-Functional Theories, part 1 (PDF). John Benjamins. pp. 121–124. ISBN 9781588113580. Retrieved 2020-01-19.
- ^ Lightfoot, David W. (2002). "Introduction to the second edition of Syntactic Structures by Noam Chomsky". In Lightfoot, David W. (ed.). Syntactic Structures (second ed.). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. pp. v–xviii. ISBN 3110172798. Retrieved 2020-02-26.
- ^ Berwick, Robert C.; Chomsky, Noam (2015). Why Only Us: Language and Evolution. MIT Press. ISBN 9780262034241.