Gramigna, Remo (2021). Facets of signs: Roman Jakobson's semiotic thought (original) (raw)
2021, (Re)considering Jakobson
was the spiritus movens of several intellectual movements of the twentieth century. He was the promoting actor of the Moscow Linguistic Circle, as well as the Society for the Study of Poetic Language (OPOJAZ), not to mention his involvement in the Prague Linguistic Circle. Moreover, he played a decisive role in the promotion of semiotic research and made untiring e orts to ensure the divulgation of Charles Sander Peirce 's ideas among the academic community of the 1950s and 1960s (Jakobson 1971i[1966]; 1985d[1975]; 1985f[1977]). For Irene Portis-Winner (1981: 3) he was a "focal synthesizer", the rst who "brought together Peircean and Saussurian concepts". Likewise, Umberto Eco (1987: 111) considered him as "the major 'catalyst' in the contemporary 'semiotic reaction'". Although many have criticized Jakobson's interpretation of Peirce's semiotics as being too selective, limited and inaccurate (Short 1998; Waugh , Monville-Burston 2002: xxxvii), there is no reason for denying Jakobson's remarkable role as a promoter of semiotic thought. 2 His achievements in this respect are undeniable and well-documented (Eco 1987; Waugh, Monville-Burston 2002: lviii-lix). In spite of this pivotal role, one cannot help but acknowledge a certain di culty in pinpointing what was Jakobson's speci c theoretical contribution to the 'doctrine of signs' , however. As in the case of some other 1 e earlier version of this paper has been published in Gramigna 2014. 2 "I must confess that for years I felt bitterness at being among linguists perhaps the sole student of Peirce 's views" (Jakobson 1985f[1977]: 250).
Sign up for access to the world's latest research
checkGet notified about relevant papers
checkSave papers to use in your research
checkJoin the discussion with peers
checkTrack your impact
Sign up for access to the world's latest research
Related papers
Struggle of a description: Peirce and his late semiotics
The paper deals with the problem of Peirce’s theory of signs, placing it within the context of modern semiotics (comparing it with Saussurean semiology, in particular), and considers Peirce’s semiotics from the point of view of his theory of categories (phaneroscopy) and in the terms of his classification of signs. The article emphasizes the complicated system of Peirce’s late, “mature”, semeiotic and his theory (classification) of Interpretant.
The Two-Way Interpretation Process in Peirce's Late Semiotics: A Priori and a Posteriori
On his own admission Peirce's priority in his work in semiotics concerned the identification of all possible signs, and it is clearly for this reason that of the two typologies announced in the letter to Lady Welby of 23 December 1908—one yielding twenty-eight classes and the other sixty-six— it was the latter that he found the more interesting, to the complete neglect of the former. And yet contributing to the originality of this particular typology is the fact that after 1906 Peirce appears no longer to employ his phaneroscopic categories as the criteria for establishing the various subdivisions in his classifications, preferring instead three modally organized universes, and, in the period from 1907 on, a growing appeal to the requirement of collateral observation of the object in definitions of the sign—both these factors being associated with a greater understanding of the nature of the dynamic object, particularly in the period 1908-1909. The paper thus seeks to demonstrate the potential for semiotic analysis of Peirce's neglected 28-class classification system by showing its originality within the fifteen or more typologies he developed between 1866 and 1908. This, it is to be hoped, will compensate for Peirce's neglect by showing how an examination of the evolving typologies sheds light on the development of his conception of signs and on the shift in the theoretical framework which underwrote it.
Peirce's semiotics and the russian formalism: points of convergence
Proceedings of the 10th World Congress of the International Association For Semiotic Studies Recurso Electronico Culture of Communication Communication of Culture Culture De La Communication Communication De La Culture Cultura De La Comunicacion Comunicacion De La Cultura 2012 Isbn 978 84 9749 522 6, 2012
it is a prevailing opinion nowadays that saussurean semiology and Peircean theory of signs are two major semiotic schools which, although they have certain theoretical and historical background in common, are utterly incommensurable. However, it appears that the opposing extremes of saussure's semiology and Peirce's semiotics seem to be reconcilable in the light of the Russian formalism-essentially a saussurean-type semiotic school, which gained wide acclaim in the mid-20th century europe, alongside the French structuralism. in his late paper «oedipus in the light of folklore» Vladimir Propp, one of the formalists, explores the problem of narrative continuity in different folklore traditions. Taking the story of Oedipus Rex as an example, he describes a set of «motives» shaping the story as specific iconic units of discourse by means of which certain forms of narrative are transmitted from one historical period to another. His analysis reveals some striking similarities with Peirce's early ideas on the nature of signs and representation, and in particular those Peirce puts forward in his «on a new list of categories». This paper undertakes to reinterpret some of the late formalist ideas on continuity in terms of Peirce's semiotics. The brief account it presents has a double aim: (1) to show the possibility of building a case where Peirce's basic semiotic ideas might actually be applied as efficient tools in analysis of different traditional discourses, and (2) to enable us to put some basic formalist analytical categories in the wider context of Peirce's semiotics, making purely structural aspect of meaning a particular case of Peirce's theory of signs.
A Semiótica de C.S. Peirce e a Gramática Especulativa de Modistae
2008
The relationships between Peirce’s Semiotic and the Grammatica Speculativa of Thomas of Erfurt, who belongs to Modistae’s medieval school, have still been little explored. Peirce shows a continuous interest in this text, and his study must have gone much further than a simple reading of the work. Peirce may have felt close to Modistae's theory because of his inquiry into the reality of generals, and his related interest in dealing with the distinction between abstract and concrete terms, like whiteness and white. This feature, in a realist context, provides Peirce with the framework he is looking for in his account of the Hypostatical Abstraction. Moreover, I believe Thomas of Erfurt's work has retained Peirce’s attention for the indexical question of the pronoun, conceived by the Modistae as a part of speech independent of noun, unlike among contemporary grammarians, who consider the pronoun as a mere substitute for the noun. As well known, Modistae aimed to set up Grammar ...
Influence of Peirce’s Semiotics on the Signification of Literary Discourse
Linguistics and Literature Studies, 2015
Semiotics principally investigates and explores the production and function of signs and sign systems as well as the methods of their signification. It is mainly concerned with how a sign signifies and what precedes it at deeper level to result in the manifestation of its meaning. For this purpose, it offers a set of unified principles that underlie the construction, signification and communication of any sign system. The literary text as a sign system serves as an artfully constructed fictional discourse that can be signified as the same way of the signification of other sign systems. This article explains the effects of Charles Sanders Peirce's theory of signs on the development of a clear methodological principle for the narrative studies, particularly for the signification of literary discourse. So it tries to give a new direction to the signification of literary discourse on the basis of the Peirce's theory of signs and cognitive theories. It mainly provides a semiotic method for the signification of literary discourse.
Exploring Peirce’s speculative grammar: The immediate object of a sign
Abstract. The paper argues against what I call the “Fregean interpretation” of Peirce’s distinction between the immediate and the dynamic object of a sign, according to which Peirce’s dynamic object is akin to Frege’s Bedeutung, while Peirce’s immediate object is akin to Frege’s Sinn. After having exposed the Fregean interpretation, I briefly reconstruct the genesis of Peirce’s notion of immediate object in his semiotic writings of the years 1904–1909 and defend the view that, according to Peirce, only propositions have immediate objects.
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.