PEIRCE, SEBEOK, AND THE SEMIOTIC REFORMATION ON CONTEMPORARY COMMUNICATIONS (original) (raw)
Related papers
A new aspect of sign and its implications for the theory of communication
Semeiosis, 2010
The article argues that Peircean semiotic can offer both logical and epistemological basis for the pursuing of a general theory of communication. However, the development of a semiotic theory of communication depends, in the first place, on a better comprehension of the formal aspects of sign, a work Peirce attributed to grammar, the first branch of his semiotic. We present an analysis of the sign relations revealing another aspect of the sign not devised by Peirce, extending their number to eleven. This newfound aspect is the triadic relation among sign, dynamic object and dynamic interpretant (S-DO-DI). We defend that this relation is essential for the comprehension of communication as semiosis, for it accounts for repetition or redundancy of communicative sign, when information is created and transmitted. The article wants to be another step to show how Peirce´s semiotic can be related to the modern philosophy of the language in the way towards a truly universal theory of communication.
Auxier.Eco, Peirce, and the Pragmatic Theory of Signs
European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy
Auxier argues that the quest for a truly general semiotics is an important point of contact between C.S. Peirce and Umberto Eco. While Peirce was not a philosopher of culture, as Eco was, this difference is superficial when it comes to comparing the operations the posit for signs, insofar as they convey meanings. Auxier shows they are both pragmatists in a similar sense, and Auxier situates Eco's nominalism against a wider backdrop of a process metaphysics Eco did not reject. In the end, Auxier argues that the need for a truly general theory of signs, or unlimited semiosis (as Eco calls it), requires some limitations that can be found in the definition and limits of the sign. It requires that signs be taken in their form of being, not just in their functions in the philosophy of culture. Auxier here provides a philosophical history of philosophy as an exercise in the philosophy of culture.
Communication, Semiotics, and the Language Rubicon (2018)
Russian Journal of Communicaation, 2018
Attempts at combining Uexküll’s ideas with those of Peirce within a single quasi-discipline called ‘biosemiotics’ are ill-founded. Peirce’s ‘interpretant’ sensu lato refers to two qualitatively different mental states, one relating to indexes and icons (INT 1) and the other to symbols (INT 2). Animal communication is dyadic – the referent is a directly induced mental state (INT 1). Glottocentric communication is triadic because the connection between symbol and INT 1 is mediated by INT 2. Whereas the gradualist view of glottogenesis is erroneous, Müller’s and Chomsky’s saltationist theories may imply that the idea of language Rubicon is antievolutionary. However, the views of Pavlov and Vygotsky and of their modern followers, Deacon and Tomasello, while being Darwinian, support the saltationist scenario. The emergence of the second signal system, of symbols, and of INT 2 was a psychological leap. In human communication, apart from the semiotic triangle (INT 1 – INT 2 – symbol), the dyadic relation between non-symbolic signs and INT 1 still holds.
C. S. Peirce’s Dialogical Conception of Sign Processes
Studies in Philosophy and Education, 2005
This article examines the contention that the central concepts of C. S. Peirce's semeiotic are inherently communicational. It is argued that the Peircean approach avoids the pitfalls of objectivism and constructivism, rendering the sign-user neither a passive recipient nor an omnipotent creator of meaning. Consequently, semeiotic may serve as a useful general framework for studies of learning processes.
Beyond meaning: Peirce’s interpretant as a meta-semiotic condition for communication
In Bergsonism, we come to a halt when it comes to communication because it involves static immobile elements such as concepts and words, which, for Bergson, make it impossible to gain an adequate understanding of each other’s nature. Peirce offers an epistemological model, where the immobility of a linguistic sign is dissolved in semiosis. Peirce’s concept of interpretant, reflecting the dynamic relation of the subject, object and the sign that is being interpreted, offers a model of cognition that is based on the dynamism of meaning making, which provides a foundation for communication as a meaning making process, a case of duration in its own right. *** En examinant la philosophie de Bergson, nous éprouvons des difficultés à trouver une fondation théorétique pour une communication réussie. Selon Bergson la communication comporte des éléments immobiles, les concepts et les mots, qui rendent impossible la compréhension adéquate de la nature humaine d’autrui. Peirce propose un modèle épistémologique permettant de dissolver l'immobilité d'un signe linguistique dans la sémiose. La théorie de l'interprétant de Peirce prend en compte la relation dynamique du sujet, de l'objet et du signe interprété. Elle implique un modèle cognitif basé sur le dynamisme de la formation de la signification. C’est ce modèle qui fournit une base pour la communication considérée comme processus de la formation de la signification et qui peut être vu comme un type de la durée bergsonienne. Please access the article here: http://www.essachess.com/index.php/jcs/article/view/139/302 http://www.essachess.com/index.php/jcs/article/view/139
C. S. Peirce on the dynamic object of a sign: From ontology to semiotics and back
Sign Systems Studies
Th at reality, and in particular the (dynamic) objects of signs, are independent of our thoughts or other representations is a crucial thesis of Peirce's realism. On the other hand, his semiotics implies the claim that all reality and all real objects are real for us only because of the signs we use. Do these two claims contradict, even exclude, each other? I will argue that both Peirce's metaphysics and his semiotics provide a natural via media: a structural account of the openness of processes, featuring transitive relations, connects process ontology implicit in his evolutionary metaphysics and the relational, quasi-inferential features embodied in interpretational sequences of signs. It is shown that Peirce's notion of a sign, its normative role and his account of the directional force of objects implies a sort of logical causality that supports the unity of objects. In this way sign sequences are able to relate fl exibly sign use with contextually specifi ed independent objects. Th at is to say, relational properties of object-oriented chains of interpretations provide sign users with a fl exible, fallibilistic instrument able to capture by contingent identity relations (teridentity) of the identity of objects in changing situations.