“Uh- Just the usual. Totally wing it, risk life and limb escape by the skin of my teeth.” – Gnomeo & Juliet (2011)
If one imagines “by the skin of my teeth”, literally, a visceral image can be imagined. Usually, it is not taken as a literal term and is only used as an idiom to describe something else. The saying “by the skin of my teeth” is usually spoken as an expression to describe a narrow escape. However, this idiom is only the latest iteration in the evolution of the term. The original term “I escaped with only the skin of my teeth” was first used in the Bible, in the passage Job 19:20, where he was left with only himself and gained nothing. “By the skin of my teeth” and other idioms pertain to the study of semiotic systems, systems of signs and symbols (language), which can apply Roland Barthes’ concept of denotation and connotation in semiotic systems.
Denotation
In Roland Barthes’ book Elements of Semiology, Barthes describes denotation as the literal; recognizable images that consist of the literal object. Thus, when using the idiom “by the skin of my teeth” as something literal, one may imagine an image like this:
[imagine a photo of a layer of skin over a set of teeth]
Gross, right? For Barthes, denotation was the first step in a semiotic system of a two part model which describes a transformation of messages (Griffin, 2012). A denotation is a single-step process from an object to its literal meaning, the signifier to the signified. It is a sign that requires a minimal amount of context to understand. This object is called “an apple” and it is accepted. However, it starts to get more complicated when the literal words start to mean something different.
Connotation
Connotations are the second part of Barthes’ two-part model, where the already signified object is reinterpreted as a signifier, which ultimately makes a sign (Griffin 2012). In other words, there are initial signs that are literal, which mean the definitional meaning of the signified, and signs that represent a meaning in the actual-use of life. This is the progression of denotations and connotations. Therefore, when the term “by the skin of my teeth” is used, it is not about gums, but it is about a narrow escape. The different meaning is a result of overlapping perspectives that a semiotic system, of which a community has in common, provides. One cannot differentiate a literal meaning of a term versus an ironic one, unless there is context that provides the knowledge to know how to differentiate the two.
Systems of Context
What is the process where detonations become connotations? The Bible depicts the tale of Job, a righteous man that lives a privileged life. It is not until Satan challenges God to test Job’s faith, where Job loses everything. Through the trials, Job has lost his wealth, his health, and his community around him. Job pleads with God that he has nothing left to give. “I am nothing but skin and bones. I have escaped with only the skin of my teeth (Job 19:20).” “Skin” is defined by Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary as “an outer covering or surface layer.” Teeth, notably, do not have an outer layer, and if they did it would be so thin it would be unnoticeable. Therefore, the skin of his teeth meant Job had nothing.
While there is no event that can be pinpointed when and where the Bible verse of Job became an idiom, there are theoretical processes that could explain how the term’s new meaning came to be. The Henry Ford Museum defines an idiom as “non-literal expression whose meaning cannot be deduced from the true meaning of its individual words (2022).” As it has been stated, the origin of “by the skin of my teeth” originated from Job, and the new meaning means to escape by a narrow margin. So, it can be assumed that a community used that term in the context of an escape where the chances of success had a margin of almost nothing. It must have been a community because as stated in class lecture, a language of one is not a language at all. This is because, if only one person speaks a language then it is not a shared system of communication that is used to mediate signs to others. Therefore, “by the skin of my teeth” is most likely a term that was popularized by others because of the perpetual use, thus changing the meaning from the origin.
Conclusion
Roland Barthes’ two-part model of the analysis of semiotic systems reveals that denotations invoke the creation of connotations. Communities take literal meanings of signs and use them in the context of their own culture and events, resulting in new meanings. Semiotic systems are systems which are ingrained in a society’s lives, signs and symbols are actively used and manipulated to fit in certain contexts in the pragmatics of a society. The only way to understand those pragmatics is to understand the context of that system. If one is not a part of a system, then they cannot make use of it. However, one does not need to know the origins of a sign or symbol, there just needs to be the context of how it is used in that system. To use “by the skin of my teeth” as an example once more, many people hear this term in daily-life or in pop culture and understand what is being referred to in that conversation. Not as many people know that term had originated in the Bible. Certainly, this illustrates that it is how the term is used in the semiotic system that one is privy to, where it actually carries meaning. Ultimately, showing the evolution of denotations and connotations and how they are used in a person’s everyday life and solidified in the pragmatics of a society.
Citations
Barthes, Roland. Elements of Semiology. Translated by Annette Lavers and Colin Smith, Jonathan Cape Ltd., 1967.
Exploring the Origins of Idioms. Henry Ford Museum, 25 February, 2022, https://www.thehenryford.org/explore/blog/exploring-the-origins-of-idioms/.
Gnomeo & Juliet. Directed by Kelly Asbury, Walt Disney Studios, 2011.
Griffin, E.M. “Semiotics of Roland Barthes.” A First Look at Communication Theory. 8th ed., McGraw Hill, 2012
“skin.” Merriam-Webster.com. 2011. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/skin (5 November, 2025)
The Bible. International Children’s Bible, 1981.
Feature image is from Gnomeo & Juliet (2011).
Hey Bridget!!
I loved your post! You did such a great job explaining Barthes’ ideas of denotation and connotation in a way that actually feels understandable and fun to read. Going from Gnomeo and Juliet to the Bible sounds insane but you still made an incredibly engaging post. It makes semiotics feel way less abstract and more connected to everyday language and pop culture. The part where you described the literal image of skin on teeth made me stop and think about how we rarely question the weird phrases we use all the time. You really showed how meaning depends on community and context, and how shared understanding turns random words into something we all instantly “get.”
I also liked how you linked the evolution of the idiom back to the Bible and how its meaning shifted through use. It’s a great example of how language changes through collective interpretation rather than formal definition. That made me think about Van den Eede’s idea of extension and how how technology (and maybe language too) isn’t just something humans create and use, but something that shapes how we think and communicate. In a way, idioms and metaphors might be extensions of cultural experience, showing how our shared history keeps feeding back into how we talk and understand the world.
It also connects a bit to Wiener’s feedback loops; the idea that communication is a constant process of adjustment and response. Once a phrase starts circulating, people interpret and reuse it, giving it new meaning every time, which then feeds back into the language system itself. Do you think idioms are a kind of “linguistic technology” in the sense that they are constantly evolving through feedback and reshape how we express ideas?
Awesome post! (also Gnomeo and Juliet is a 10/10 movie love whenever it makes an appearance)
Hi Sam!
Thank you for the kind words! I do think idioms are a linguistic technology because, just as you said, these terms are constantly being revitalized and put into a different context. These “second-lives” are creating new meaning and humans rely on them to mediate various messages. Language is just a tool humans rely on, it is a semiotic system which is a technology. Thus, in that line of thought, idioms are a linguistic technology, and they can be edited or reformed. That malleability of control that humans have on idioms and language differentiate language as a natural phenomenon; furthering this argument that idioms are linguistic technology.
Thank you for your comment 😀
Hi Bridghet, this is really well-written and informative. I like your choice of image, very eye-catching, it drew me to your blog. Additionally, the quote from Gnomeo and Juliet is well-contextualised and a unique way to hook your reader, it definitely worked on me. It’s interesting how you went so far back to find the origin of this well-known idiom .This visualisation of denotations versus connotations using “the skin of my teeth” definitely helped me better understand the difference and overlap in Barthes’ two part model.Love 10/10!
Hi Maxine 😀
Thank you for your kind words! I tried to use a well-known, yet older idiom because of this opportunity to trace its origins. I am glad it was a helpful representation to Barthes’ semiotic model!
Thank you!
Hi Bridget, I really enjoyed how you analyzed the phrase “by the skin of my teeth” through Barth’s idea of denotation and connotation. Your example made the concept of the semiotics system feel very clear and grounded in a real example. I liked how you traced the idioms’ origin back to he bible and showed how their meaning transformed through shared cultural use, which illustrated how language is a living system that evolves with people. It made me reflect on how many other common sayings we use daily have meanings that have shifted from their original context. Do you think understanding the origins of idioms changes how we use them, or does their meaning entirely depend on how people interpret them now?
Hello Bridghet Wood.
I quite enjoyed this.. I think it was a great way to simplify and explain Roland Barthes’ framework of denotation and connotation. The way that you progress Gnomeo and Juliet into the story of Job, I find, is quite apt in the sense that it is an application of cultural meaning placed in a text that has large cult significance (and is a repetition/adaptation of another cultural text. Clever). You did a great job shifting from the literal to the cultural through a very strong analysis. Great job. Cheers.