DOCSLIB.ORG

STUDY MATERIAL for POST GRADUATE SEMESTER 2 – CC-VIII LECTURE-5-Modern and Contemporary Theory

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
STUDY MATERIAL for POST GRADUATE SEMESTER 2 – CC-VIII LECTURE-5-Modern and Contemporary Theory SEMESTER-2 10.04.2020 STUDY MATERIAL FOR POST GRADUATE SEMESTER 2 – CC-VIII LECTURE-5-Modern and Contemporary Theory 2020 CC- VIII STUDY MATERIAL FOR POST GRADUATE SEMESTER 2 – CC-VIII Modern and Contemporary Theory UNIT 1-FROM LIBERAL HUMANISM TO THEORY A. FORMALISM B. STRUCTURALISM C. NARRATOLOGY UNIT 2-PSYCHO ANALYSIS,FEMINISM,ECO CRITICISM UNIT-3- MARXISM; THE NEW HISTORISM; POST COLONIALISM; CULTURAL MATERIALSM UNIT-4-POST STRUCTURALISM UNIT-5-POST MODERNISM This is a brief Introduction of what you all have to study for the preparation of CC-VIII paper. STRUCTURALISM What is known as Structuralism and structuralist literary theory is an intellectual movement that embraces a number of different approaches that have some basic ideas in common. The fundamental insights of structuralism are rived from or influenced by several streams of thought. The Linguistic Circles of Prague (among whose leaders were N.S.Trubetzkoy and Roman Jakobson) and copenhagen (where the outstanding figure was Louis Hjelmslev, originator of a Linguistic theory known as glossematics), Ferdinend D, saussure’s seminal ideas on structural linguistics, the french cultural anthropologist Claude Levi – Strauss study of system that under lie different culture, the American School which derived originally from the ideas of Leonard Bloom Field and later from Noam Chomsky, the firthin and neo firthin schools in England, other concepts of sign and system, the assumption that poetics is the “science of literature”- all such ideas contributed to the growth and development of structuralism This can be broadly shown as in the diagram below LECTURE- Although structuralism started as a mode of approach in linguistic and anthropological study, it has influenced all other areas such as sociology, psychoanalysis, philosophy, history, economic theory, political theory, semiotics, myth studies, literary criticism etc. In Continuation of 1ST Lecture CC-VIII, Modern and Contemporary theory. STRUCTURALISM Text – oriented theories can be classified into four categories based on what is broadly labelled as “STRUCTURALISM”. That is centred around a set of concepts and beliefs like order, pattern, design, form, objectivity, symbolism etc. The following theories and approaches are basically – text-centred and structuralist. 1. Formalism 2. Practial Criticism. 3. Structuralism 4. Post Structuralism Structuralism, a parallel development during the same period 1930 – 1970’s considered a text only in terms of language and its system of conventions. Ferdinand ded Saussure, the Swiss linguist, is the founder of structural linguistic and his ideas influenced structuralism. In structuralism the focus is the phono/lexico/grammatical constituents of a literary work and the differences between the linguistics signs that create meaning. In other words, it is the systematic sets of signifiers and conventions in the language that help literary texts to the “signify” or “to mean”. Literary meaning, according to the stucturalist approach, is constructed only by paying attention to the principles of relations and differences. An extreme form of language/code centred , test - oriented criticism, more in the nature of an application of linguistic principles, was also advocated by some linguistically oriented critics in the name of stylistics or linguistic criticism concentrating on the linguistic features of a literary text and taking linguistic beyond sentenced grammar “to text grammar”. This is the basic of structuralism Saussure (1857-1913) began by defyning the scope and limits of his study.”He preposed a number of distinctions like . La langue and la paraole Synchronic and diachronic analysi Paradigmatic and syntagmatic relationships Signifier and signified Lalangue is the system, the institution called language which is a set of impersonal rules and conventions “Lang is trans individual and abstract. Parole is the actual manifestation of language in speaking, which is taken as primary “Parole is individual/concrete. If the study deals with the description of a language at a given point of time it is called synchronic, and if it deals with changes that occur in the course of time, it is called diachronic. Those Saussure did not reject the value of the di-chronic studies, he asserted that the diachronic perspective deals with the phenomenon that are un-related to the systems although they do condition them. Syntagmatic, is the linear arrangement of units as in a chain; units may be sounds, letters, words, sentences etc. Paradigmatic is the vertical arrangement of units as in a ladder; the units may be sounds, letters, words, sentences, etc. Some scholar feel that all behaviour patterns show these two types of relationships. It is also maintained that all linguistic relationship are binary, for example , p/b are the level of sound, statement/question at the level of syntext, human/non-human at the level of meaning, etc. Language, Saussure said, is a system of signs and the linguistic sign is a two-sided psychological entity, composed of a concept and a sound image. I propose to retain the word sign to designate the whole and to replace concept and sound image respectively by signified and signifier. The relationship between the signifier and the signified was arbitrary with respect to nature/object but not with respect to culture. For ex, the word tree in English refer to an object which is identified and excepted by English speaking people it is arbitrary since there is no inherent connection between sounds and there reference. Concept/Object = Signified SIGN I propose LECTURE-1 Expression = SignifierLECTURE -1 Language, according to Saussure, is a system of inter related units and the value of the units is determined by their places in the system at a given time and a given state. The stress laid on the synchronic study and the analysis of language as systematic structure in terms of binary contrast of signifiers laid the foundations of modern structural linguistics. One can find similar sets of assumptions in the structuralist poetics of roman Jakobson, in the cultural and anthropology of Claude Levi-Strauss in the psycho analytic theories of Sigmund freud, in the sociology of Durkheim, in the bloom fieldian and Chomskyan linguistics, in the new criticism and practical cticism, Firthian and Neo Firthian functunal linguistics all of which are essentially structural. I am Aktar Islam, Research Scholar, L.N.M.U under the supervision of Prof. Punita Jha. I am going to deliver a lecture on Formalism basically on Russian Formalism. I have given you some basic points that will be very easy to understand. 1. Formalism In 20th century, there arose two formalistic movements namely, a. American New Criticism b. Russian Formalism Both the movements share a lot of characteristics and are almost similar in nature. Both of these movements talked about Formal aspects of literature and hence, both are kept under the same tag FORMALISM. Russian Formalism A type of literary theory and analysis that emerged in Moscow and St. Petersberg in the second decade of 20th century is called Formalism. Actually its practitioners focused on the FORM (rather than CONTENT) of any literary work. Like Structuralism, the Formalists believed in certain key assumptions – a. Literature, especially poetry, was a special function of language. b. It was possible to discover the underlying formulae or structures of literary texts by a study of its devices ( a term they were fond of using to describe literary techniques such as symbolism) c. Literary analysis could be as accurate and precise as science. There were two schools of Russian Formalism namely, a. The Moscow Linguistic Circle (1915), led by Roman Jakobson, Osip Brik and Boris Tomashevsky. b. The second group, the Society for the Study of Poetic Language (Opoyaz), was founded in 1916, and its leading practitioners included Victor Shklovsky, Boris Eichenbaum, and Yuri Tynyanov. Other important critics associated with these movements included Leo Jakubinsky and the folklorist, Vladimir Propp. N.B: When these critical modes were suppressed by the Soviets in the early 1930s, the centre of the formal study of literature moved to Czechoslovakia, where it was continued especially by members of the Prague Linguistic Circle, which included Roman Jakobson (emigrated from Russia), Jan Mukarovsky, and Rene Wellek. Key Terms and concepts of Russian Formalism a. Literariness It was first introduced by Roman Jakobson in 1921. According to him, ‘the object of literary science is not literature but literariness, i.e. what makes a given work a literary work’. b. Defamiliarization This concept was introduced by Victor Shklovsky. The main word was ‘ostranenie’ (making strange). To ‘defamiliarize’ is to make fresh, new strange, different what is familiar and known. Through defamiliarization, the writer modifies the reader’s habitual perceptions by drawing attention to the artifice of the text. c. Foregrounding It was a concept by Jan Mukarovsky. To ‘foreground’ is to bring something into prominence, to make it dominant in perception. It will be right to say something about theories of narrative – ‘story’ and ‘plot’ that were very prominent in Russian Formalism. The formalists indicated that ‘plot’ (sjuzet) is strictly literary, while ‘story’ (fabula) is merely raw material awaiting the organizing hand of the writer. Post – Structuralism: Deconstruction In order to understand Post Structurism, we have to have a clear concept of Post modernism and Modernism. So I have started my lecture with the introduction of post modernism and post structurism which is basically the condition of mind and a way of life, be it textual which is concerned with text and since both are theories, a clear conception of modernism and Structurism is given below Post- Modernism If modernism and postmodernism are ways of looking at things a condition of the mind and a way of life, structuralism and post structuralism are generally used with reference to literary and language studies I.e. textual or mostly to academic areas.as in structure anthropology, structural linguistics, structuralist poetics, Structuralist narratology and post structuralist criticism.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Article-755-623839.Pdf
    دوﻣﺎﻫﻨﺎﻣﺔ ﻋﻠﻤﻲ - ﭘﮋوﻫﺸﻲ 9د ، ش 1 (ﭘﻴﺎﭘﻲ 43 )، ﻓﺮوردﻳﻦ و اردﻳﺒﻬﺸﺖ 1397 ، ﺻﺺ 81 - 111 ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﻛﺎرﻛﺮد ﮔﻔﺘﻤﺎﻧﻲ ﻃﻨﺰ در ﺑﺎب اول ﮔﻠﺴﺘﺎن ﺳﻌﺪي؛ روﻳﻜﺮد ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﺷﻨﺎﺳﻲ ﻗﻬﺮﻣﺎن ﺷﻴﺮي1 ، ﻧﺠﻤﻪ ﻧﻈﺮي2 ، ﻧﻮﺷﻴﻦ ﺑﻬﺮاﻣﻲ ﭘﻮر3* 1 . اﺳﺘﺎد ﮔﺮوه زﺑﺎن و ادﺑﻴﺎت ﻓﺎرﺳﻲ داﻧﺸﮕﺎه ﺑﻮﻋﻠﻲ ﺳﻴﻨﺎ، ﻫﻤﺪان، اﻳﺮان 2 . اﺳﺘﺎدﻳﺎر ﮔﺮوه زﺑﺎن و ادﺑﻴﺎت ﻓﺎرﺳﻲ داﻧﺸﮕﺎه ﺑﻮﻋﻠﻲ ﺳﻴﻨﺎ ، ﻫﻤﺪان، اﻳﺮان 3 . داﻧﺸﺠﻮي دﻛﺘﺮي زﺑﺎن و ادﺑﻴﺎت ﻓﺎرﺳﻲ داﻧﺸﮕﺎه ﺑﻮﻋﻠﻲ ﺳﻴﻨﺎ ، ﻫﻤﺪان، اﻳﺮان درﻳﺎﻓﺖ: /4/24 96 ﭘﺬﻳﺮش: /8/6 96 96 ﭼﻜﻴﺪه ﻫﺪف اﻳﻦ ﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪ ﭘﻴﺎده ﺳﺎزي روش ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﺷﻨﺎﺳﻲ ﺑﺮاي دﺳﺘ ﻴﺎﺑﻲ ﺑﻪ اﻟﮕﻮ ﻳﺎ اﻟﮕﻮﻫﺎي ﺣﺎﻛﻢ ﺑﺮ ﻓﺮاﻳﻨﺪﻫﺎي ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳ ﻲ ﻛﻨﺸﻲ و ﺗﻨﺸﻲ و ﻧﺸﺎن دادنِ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮ ﺟﺮﻳﺎن زﻳﺒﺎﻳﻲ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻲ ﺑﺮ ﻓﺮاﻳﻨﺪﻫﺎي ﻣﺬﻛﻮر در ﺑﺴﺘﺮ ﮔﻔﺘﻤﺎن ﻃﻨﺰ ﺑﺎب اول ﮔﻠﺴﺘﺎن ﺳﻌﺪي اﺳﺖ واز اﻳﻦ ﺟﻬﺖ، ﻧﺨﺴﺘﻴﻦ ﻛﻮﺷﺶ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻤﺎر ﻣﻲ آﻳﺪ. ﻣﻘﺼﻮد از ﻃﻨﺰ، ﺳﺨﻦ ﻣﻄﺎﻳﺒﻪ آﻣﻴﺰِ اﻧﺘﻘﺎدي اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑ ﺎ ﻫﺪف اﺻﻼح اﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻲ و ﺑﻪ ﻛﻤﻚ ﺟﺮﻳﺎن زﻳﺒﺎﻳﻲ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻲ در ز ﺑﺎن ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻲ ﮔﻴﺮد و ﺑﺎ ﻫﺰل و ﻫﺠﻮ ﻓﺮق دارد. روش ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﺷﻨﺎﺳﻲ در ﭘﻲ ﺗﺠﺰﻳﻪ و ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﮔﻔﺘﻤﺎن ﺑﺮاي ﭘﻲ ﺑﺮدن ﺑﻪ ﺷﺮاﻳﻂ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ و درﻳﺎﻓﺖ آن اﺳﺖ. ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﺷﻨﺎس ﺑﺎ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﻪ اي ﻣﻌﻨﺎدار روﺑﻪ روﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ در ﻣﺮﺣﻠﺔ ﻧﺨﺴﺖ ﻓﺮﺿﻴﻪ ﻫﺎي ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻲ و ﻧﻮع ارﺗﺒﺎط آن ﻫﺎ ﺑﺎ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ را در ﻧﻈ ﺮ ﻣﻲ ﮔﻴﺮد . ﺳﭙﺲ ، ﺑﻪ ﺟﺴﺖ وﺟﻮي ﺻﻮرت ﻫﺎﻳﻲ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ اﻳﻦ ﻓﺮﺿﻴﻪ ﻫﺎي ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻲ ﻣﻄﺎﺑﻘﺖ دارﻧﺪ، ﻣﻲ ﭘﺮدازد ﺗﺎ اﺛﺒﺎت آن ﻓﺮﺿﻴﻪ ﻫﺎ ﻣﻴﺴﺮ ﺷﻮد. ﻓﺮﺿﻴﺔ ﭘﮋوﻫﺶ ﺣﺎﺿﺮ اﻳﻦ اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻓﺮاﻳﻨﺪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻲ در ﮔﻔﺘﻤﺎن ﻃﻨﺰ ﻧﻈﺎم ﻛﻨﺸﻲ را ﺑﻪ ﺗﻨﺸﻲ ﺗﺒﺪﻳﻞ ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﺪ و ﺑﺎ ﺑﺮﻗﺮاري ﺗﻌﺎﻣﻞ ﺑﻴﻦ اﺑﻌﺎد ﻓﺸﺎره اي (ﻋﺎﻃﻔﻲ، دروﻧﻲ) و ﮔﺴﺘﺮه اي (ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻲ، ﺑﻴﺮوﻧﻲ) ﻓﻀﺎﻳﻲ ﺳﻴﺎل را ﻣﻲ آﻓﺮﻳﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺧﻠﻖ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻲ ﺑﺪﻳﻊ را ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﻣﻲ ﺳﺎزد.
    [Show full text]
  • A Prologue to Charles Sanders Peirce's Theory of Signs
    In Lieu of Saussure: A Prologue to Charles Sanders Peirce’s Theory of Signs E. San Juan, Jr. Language is as old as consciousness, language is practical consciousness that exists also for other men, and for that reason alone it really exists for me personally as well; language, like consciousness, only arises from the need, the necessity, of intercourse with other men. – Karl Marx, The German Ideology (1845-46) General principles are really operative in nature. Words [such as Patrick Henry’s on liberty] then do produce physical effects. It is madness to deny it. The very denial of it involves a belief in it. – C.S. Peirce, Harvard Lectures on Pragmatism (1903) The era of Saussure is dying, the epoch of Peirce is just struggling to be born. Although pragmatism has been experiencing a renaissance in philosophy in general in the last few decades, Charles Sanders Peirce, the “inventor” of this anti-Cartesian, scientific- realist method of clarifying meaning, still remains unacknowledged as a seminal genius, a polymath master-thinker. William James’s vulgarized version has overshadowed Peirce’s highly original theory of “pragmaticism” grounded on a singular conception of semiotics. Now recognized as more comprehensive and heuristically fertile than Saussure’s binary semiology (the foundation of post-structuralist textualisms) which Cold War politics endorsed and popularized, Peirce’s “semeiotics” (his preferred rubric) is bound to exert a profound revolutionary influence. Peirce’s triadic sign-theory operates within a critical- realist framework opposed to nominalism and relativist nihilism (Liszka 1996). I endeavor to outline here a general schema of Peirce’s semeiotics and initiate a hypothetical frame for interpreting Michael Ondaatje’s Anil’s’ Ghost, an exploratory or Copyright © 2012 by E.
    [Show full text]
  • {PDF} Elements of Semiology Ebook Free Download
    ELEMENTS OF SEMIOLOGY PDF, EPUB, EBOOK Roland Barthes | 112 pages | 31 Dec 1997 | ATLANTIC BOOKS | 9780374521462 | English | Kent, United Kingdom Elements of Semiology PDF Book I would recommend something more simple like Sebeok, who writes about the same concepts but it's more accessible in terms of vocabulary and style. This is a matter of specifying the semes the elements that make up a signified associated with these colours, which are the signifiers. Barthes is a lucid thinker. These classifications are borrowed from structural linguistics, and consist of the categories of language and speech, signified and signifier, syntagm and system, and denotation and connotation Barthes, The division into categories is always a process of social construction. This general correlation itself is nevertheless arbitrary, however we may rationalize it. The sign-function therefore has probably an anthropological value, since it is the very unit where the relations of the technical and the significant are woven together. But perhaps we should here exchange the notion of cars as objects for that of cars as sociological facts; we would then find in the driving of cars the variations in usage of the object which usually make up the plane of speech. According to him, each plane comprises two strata: form and substance; we must insist on the new definition of these two terms, for each of them has a weighty lexical past. The following table shows the main semes that can be associated with each colour, in our opinion. Language is such a system. The yellow light is intermediate in two ways: It is intermediate in time being in the middle of the sequence, and we shall come back to this and of course, its meaning is intermediate.
    [Show full text]
  • Charles Sanders Peirce - Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia 9/2/10 4:55 PM
    Charles Sanders Peirce - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 9/2/10 4:55 PM Charles Sanders Peirce From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Charles Sanders Peirce (pronounced /ˈpɜrs/ purse[1]) Charles Sanders Peirce (September 10, 1839 – April 19, 1914) was an American philosopher, logician, mathematician, and scientist, born in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Peirce was educated as a chemist and employed as a scientist for 30 years. It is largely his contributions to logic, mathematics, philosophy, and semiotics (and his founding of pragmatism) that are appreciated today. In 1934, the philosopher Paul Weiss called Peirce "the most original and versatile of American philosophers and America's greatest logician".[2] An innovator in many fields (including philosophy of science, epistemology, metaphysics, mathematics, statistics, research methodology, and the design of experiments in astronomy, geophysics, and psychology) Peirce considered himself a logician first and foremost. He made major contributions to logic, but logic for him encompassed much of that which is now called epistemology and philosophy of science. He saw logic as the Charles Sanders Peirce formal branch of semiotics, of which he is a founder. As early as 1886 he saw that logical operations could be carried out by Born September 10, 1839 electrical switching circuits, an idea used decades later to Cambridge, Massachusetts produce digital computers.[3] Died April 19, 1914 (aged 74) Milford, Pennsylvania Contents Nationality American 1 Life Fields Logic, Mathematics, 1.1 United States Coast Survey Statistics, Philosophy, 1.2 Johns Hopkins University Metrology, Chemistry 1.3 Poverty Religious Episcopal but 2 Reception 3 Works stance unconventional 4 Mathematics 4.1 Mathematics of logic C.
    [Show full text]
  • From Braudel to Derrida: Mohammed Arkoun’S Rethinking of Islam and Religion
    MEJCC Middle East Journal of Culture and Communication 4 (2011) 23–43 brill.nl/mjcc From Braudel to Derrida: Mohammed Arkoun’s Rethinking of Islam and Religion Carool Kersten King’s College London, UK Email: [email protected] Abstract Th is article examines Mohammed Arkoun as one of the pioneers of a new Muslim intellectualism seeking new ways of engaging with Islam by combining intimate familiarity with the Islamic civilizational heritage (turath ) and solid knowledge of recent achievements by the Western academe in the humanities and social sciences. It will show how his groundbreaking and agenda- setting work in Islamic studies refl ects a convergence of the spatiotemporal concerns of an intellectual historian inspired by the Annales School with an epistemological critique drawing on structuralist and poststructuralist ideas. Infl uenced by Paul Ricoeur’s hermeneutics and the deconstructionist philosophy of Jacques Derrida, Arkoun evolved from a specialist in the intellectual history of medieval Islam into a generic critic of epistemologies, advocating a concept of so-called ‘emerging reason’ which transcends existing forms of religious reason, Enlightenment rationalism and the tele-techno-scientifi c reason of the postmodern globalizing world. Th is article concludes that Arkoun’s proposals challenge the intellectual binary of the West versus Islam and the historical dichotomy between the northern and southern Mediterranean. Keywords Arkoun , Islam , epistemology , postmodernism , Mediterranean Introduction In the last twenty years or so the literature on the intellectual history of the contemporary Muslim world has begun recognizing a new type of Muslim intellectual (Kersten 2009 : 10). On the spectrum of present-day Muslim thought they are located on the opposite side from the exponents of a narrow and scripture-based interpretation of Islamic revivalism.
    [Show full text]
  • Roman Jakobson and the Birth of Linguistic Structuralism
    Sign Systems Studies 39(1), 2011 Roman Jakobson and the birth of linguistic structuralism W. Keith Percival Department of Linguistics, The University of Kansas 3815 N. E. 89th Street, Seattle, WA 98115, U.S.A e-mail: [email protected] Abstract. The term “structuralism” was introduced into linguistics by Roman Jakobson in the early days of the Linguistic Circle of Prague, founded in 1926. The cluster of ideas defended by Jakobson and his colleagues can be specified but differ considerably from the concept of structuralism as it has come to be understood more recently. That took place because from the 1930s on it became customary to equate structuralism with the ideas of Ferdinand de Saussure, as expounded in his posthumous Cours de linguistique générale (1916). It can be shown, however, that Jakobson’s group rejected Saussure’s theory for ideological reasons. As the term “structuralism” became more widely used it came to be associated with posi- tivist approaches to linguistics rather than with the original phenomenological orientation that had characterized the Linguistic Circle of Prague. The purpose of this paper is to clarify these different approaches and to suggest that because of its extreme porosity the word “structuralism” is an example of a “terminological pandemic”. More research on the varied uses to which the key terms “structure” and “structuralism” were put will undoubtedly further elucidate this important episode in 20th-century intellectual history. 1. Introduction In this article, I shall examine the early history of linguistic structu- ralism and the role played in it by the Russian philologist and linguist Roman Jakobson (1896–1982).
    [Show full text]
  • A Literary Semiotics Approach to the Semantic Universe of George Orwell’S Nineteen Eighty-Four
    A Literary Semiotics Approach to the Semantic Universe of George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four A Literary Semiotics Approach to the Semantic Universe of George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four By Murat Kalelioğlu A Literary Semiotics Approach to the Semantic Universe of George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four By Murat Kalelioğlu This book first published 2018 Cambridge Scholars Publishing Lady Stephenson Library, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE6 2PA, UK British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Copyright © 2018 by Murat Kalelioğlu All rights for this book reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owner. ISBN (10): 1-5275-2018-8 ISBN (13): 978-1-5275-2018-9 Dedicated to in loving memory of my beloved mother Muazzez KALELİOĞLU TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tables .............................................................................................. ix List of Figures............................................................................................. xi Foreword ................................................................................................... xii V. Doğan Günay Preface ....................................................................................................... xv List of Abbreviations ..............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Handbook-Of-Semiotics.Pdf
    Page i Handbook of Semiotics Page ii Advances in Semiotics THOMAS A. SEBEOK, GENERAL EDITOR Page iii Handbook of Semiotics Winfried Nöth Indiana University Press Bloomington and Indianapolis Page iv First Paperback Edition 1995 This English­language edition is the enlarged and completely revised version of a work by Winfried Nöth originally published as Handbuch der Semiotik in 1985 by J. B. Metzlersche Verlagsbuchhandlung, Stuttgart. ©1990 by Winfried Nöth All rights reserved No part of this book may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. The Association of American University Presses' Resolution on Permissions constitutes the only exception to this prohibition. Manufactured in the United States of America Library of Congress Cataloging­in­Publication Data Nöth, Winfried. [Handbuch der Semiotik. English] Handbook of semiotics / Winfried Nöth. p. cm.—(Advances in semiotics) Enlarged translation of: Handbuch der Semiotik. Bibliography: p. Includes indexes. ISBN 0­253­34120­5 1. Semiotics—handbooks, manuals, etc. 2. Communication —Handbooks, manuals, etc. I. Title. II. Series. P99.N6513 1990 302.2—dc20 89­45199 ISBN 0­253­20959­5 (pbk.) CIP 4 5 6 00 99 98 Page v CONTENTS Preface ix Introduction 3 I. History and Classics of Modern Semiotics History of Semiotics 11 Peirce 39 Morris 48 Saussure 56 Hjelmslev 64 Jakobson 74 II. Sign and Meaning Sign 79 Meaning, Sense, and Reference 92 Semantics and Semiotics 103 Typology of Signs: Sign, Signal, Index 107 Symbol 115 Icon and Iconicity 121 Metaphor 128 Information 134 Page vi III.
    [Show full text]
  • Peircean Interpretation of Postmodern Architecture
    PEIRCEAN INTERPRETATION OF POSTMODERN ARCHITECTURE A Dissertation by IWAO TAKAHASHI Submitted to the Office of Graduate and Professional Studies of Texas A&M University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Chair of Committee, Robert Warden Committee Members, Frances E. Downing Robert W. Burch Gregory F. Pappas Head of Department, Ward V. Wells December 2013 Major Subject: Architecture Copyright 2013 Iwao Takahashi ABSTRACT The influence of philosophy on architectural theory contributes to the formulation of architectural theory in the history of architecture. This relationship created the oscillation of architectural theory between rationalism and romanticism reflecting the woven tendency of philosophy such as enlightenment and counter-enlightenment movement. This dissertation research focuses on architectural language theory which maintains a tight relationship with the philosophy of language. Postmodern architecture during the period of the 1970s through 1980s is examined to determine meanings of architecture, and the language theory of architecture. It followed the philosophy of language originated from Ferdinand de Saussure who influenced theorists, and explicitly sign theorists influenced by Charles Sanders Peirce. This theoretical underpinning of language theory is questionable because of an inappropriate application of the sign theory of Charles Sanders Peirce in terms of principal interpretation of language structure, dyadic and triadic type of language. This research re-interprets the meaning of architecture during postmodern period along with Peirce’s semeiotic theory, and American Pragmatism that Peirce originally invented. The collection of evidence from architectural history and the influence from philosophy provides a conceptual sketch that the oscillation of theoretical tendency is the source of architectural creation.
    [Show full text]
  • Full-Text (PDF)
    Vol.7(3), pp. 59-66, March 2015 DOI: 10.5897/JMCS2014.0412 Article Number: ABC767050719 Journal of Media and Communication ISSN 2141 -2189 Copyright © 2015 Studies Author(s) retain the copyright of this article http://www.academicjournlas.org/JMCS Full Length Research Paper Reinterpreting some key concepts in Barthes’ theory Sui Yan and Fan Ming* Foreign Languages Department, Beijing University of Agriculture, 7 Beinong Road, Changping District, Beijing, 102206, China. Received 16 September; 2014; Accepted 12 February, 2015 The paper makes clear some basic concepts in semiotic studies like signifier, signified and referent and core concepts in Roland Barthes’s theory are restudied with new developments especially in connotateurs, meta-language and meaning transfer, which play a key role in understanding how myth is constructed with the two mechanisms of naturalizing and generalizing. With the new understanding, the paper studies the representative signs from television and their semiotic function and concludes that meaning transfer is the fundamental way for media signs to construct new meanings. Key words: semiotics, Barthes, media signs INTRODUCTION Signification, denotation, connotation and meta- community’ (Cullen, 1976: 19) buys into. But for Barthes, language the culmination of meaning created by signifier plus signified is more than just a system of random naming or It is Ferdinand de Saussure who makes the important nomenclature. It is subject to a rich layering of meaning distinction between signifier and signified of a sign according to each country’s cultures. Barthes (1981) and (Saussure, 1915/1966), which incurs persistent and Moriarty (1991) extend the study of signs in culture, and diversified study on the structural characteristics of signs.
    [Show full text]
  • Semiotics: the Representation, Construction and Evaluation of Reality
    ================================================================== Language in India www.languageinindia.com ISSN 1930-2940 Vol. 14:8 August 2014 ================================================================== Semiotics: The Representation, Construction and Evaluation of Reality Mohammad Firoj Al Mamun Khan ================================================== Abstract Semiotics works with signs and has developed based on the sign system as propounded by Saussure. Centering on the sign systems of Charles Sanders Peirce, an American philosopher and Ferdinand De Saussure, a Swiss Linguist, Semiotics takes into account diverse areas and parallels those to the linguistic signification system. In the process, the scope and nature of the fields have been broadened deviating at times from the central notions of its origin. The current paper focuses on the purpose of its use, its functional procedures and on how it cuts across other disciplines. Introduction As semiotics functions based on sign system that is, linguistic system, at first we need to focus, on sign and its associated areas that underpin the system of language. According to Charles Sander Peirce (Peirce, 1931-35), who is considered as one of the proponents of his own brand of semiotics, the other being Ferdinand de Saussure, anything that signifies something or somebody is a sign. He considered sign as a part of the social life. The foundational basis of the structural semiotics is the sign. It deals with anything that can be regarded as a sign (Eco, 1976). According to Saussure, (Saussure, 1983) sign is a structure that has intrinsic meaning and is a psychological entity, not the material thing. From Saussurean perspective, sign has two parts—signifier—the sound image and signified—the concept. In this sign system, the referent that is the object, that the signifier stands for, is left out or left aside.
    [Show full text]
  • Semiotic Interpretation of Bangla Ligatures: an Introduction
    Semiotic Interpretation of Bangla Ligatures 123 124 Sanjida Afrin The Dhaka University Journal of Linguistics: Vol. 2 No.3 February, 2009 sign, as the notion ‘sign’ lies at the heart of this discipline. Page: 111-124, Published on December 2009 by the Registrar, Dhaka University ISSN-2075-3098 ‘Sign are found in the physical form of words, image, sounds, acts or objects .... Signs things have no intrinsic meaning and become signs only when we invest them with meaning with Semiotic Interpretation of Bangla Ligatures: reference to a recognized code’. (Chandler, 2002 : 241). An Introduction Anything can be a sign as long as someone interprets it as 'signifying' something - referring to or standing for something Sanjida Afrin 1 other than itself. We interpret things as signs largely unconsciously by relating them to familiar systems of 1. M. Phil Researcher, Department of Linguistics, University of conventions. Dhaka. In the writing system, alphabets are also signs and therefore we Abstract can assume that they can be interpreted by semiotics. This Semiotics is the study of sign processes emphasizing broad hypothesis has led us to analyze the structure of Bangla signification and communication, signs and symbols of ligatures in the light of this discipline, since it is well known different social phenomena. In the late 19th and early 20th century the works of Ferdinand de Saussure and Charles that one of the distinctive components of Bangla writing Sanders Peirce led to the emergence of semiotics as a system is ligature. In writing and typography, a ligature occurs separate discipline as well as method for examining where two or more letterforms are written or printed as a unit.
    [Show full text]