How did deconstruction challenge claims that language has a fixed meaning?

Deconstruction, a movement prominently championed by Paul de Man and Jacques Derrida, challenged the notion of fixed meaning by arguing that language does not function as a stable vehicle for conveying pre-existing intentions or truths.123

Instead of viewing words as having inherent, static definitions, deconstruction posits that meaning is generated through the "play" of differences between linguistic signs. Drawing on the insights of Ferdinand de Saussure, deconstructionists argue that a word’s meaning is determined only by its contrast with other words in an infinite, shifting chain. Because each word relies on the "traces" of others, meaning is never fully present; it is perpetually deferred.2

Furthermore, deconstruction exposes how texts rely on "binary oppositions"—such as speech/writing or nature/culture—where one term is falsely privileged as primary. By revealing the internal contradictions and figurative nature of language, deconstruction demonstrates that these hierarchies are merely textual constructions rather than objective realities. Ultimately, this approach suggests that language is inherently unstable, performative, and resistant to any single, definitive interpretation.24