DOCSLIB.ORG

Typology of Signs; Sign, Signal, Index Lecturer

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Typology of Signs; Sign, Signal, Index Lecturer TYPOLOGY OF SIGNS; SIGN, SIGNAL, INDEX LECTURER: Dr. HARLINAH SAHIB, M.HUM. CREATED BY: YUNUS F022191031 ENGLISH LANGUAGE STUDY FACULTY OF CULTURAL STUDIES UNIVERSITAS HASANUDDIN MAKASSAR 2020 I. Introduction Literature is related to author’s view, as Rahman Stated in his article that “Literature as an identity is referred to as ethno-literature.” (Rahman, 2020). In another article Rahman stated that “Literature is a source of learning and entertainment for readers.” (Rahman, Amir P., & Tammasse, 2019). Sahib in her journal article explained about the forestry and how to use language as the medium put attention to the forest, she stated that “The desire and effort to improve forestry has not shown a delightful or wonderful result.” (Sahib, Rahman, Duli, & Asba, 2019). Semiotics began to become a major approach to cultural studies in the late 1960s, partly as a result of the work of Roland Barthes. The translation into English of his popular essays in a collection entitled Mythologies (Barthes 1957), followed in the 1970s and 1980s by many of his other writings, and greatly increased scholarly awareness of this approach. Writing in 1964, Barthes declared that 'semiology aims to take in any system of signs, whatever their substance and limits; images, gestures, musical sounds, objects, and the complex associations of all of these, which form the content of ritual, convention or public entertainment: these constitute, if not languages, at least systems of signification' (Barthes 1967, 9). The adoption of semiotics in Britain was influenced by its prominence in the work of the Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies (CCCS) at the University of Birmingham whilst the Centre was under the direction of the neo-Marxist sociologist Stuart Hall (director 1969-79). Although semiotics may be less central now within cultural and media studies (at least in its earlier, more structuralist form), it remains essential for anyone in the field to understand it. What individual scholars have to assess, of course, is whether and how semiotics may be useful in shedding light on any aspect of their concerns. Note that Saussure's term, 'semiology' is sometimes used to refer to the Saussurean tradition, whilst 'semiotics' sometimes refers to the Peircean tradition, but that nowadays the term 'semiotics' is more likely to be used as an umbrella term to embrace the whole field (Nöth 1990, 14). Semiotics is not widely institutionalized as an academic discipline. It is a field of study involving many different theoretical stances and methodological tools. One of the broadest definitions is that of Umberto Eco, who states that 'semiotics is concerned with everything that can be taken as a sign' (Eco 1976, 7). Semiotics involves the study not only of what we refer to as 'signs' in everyday speech, but of anything which 'stands for' something else. In a semiotic sense, signs take the form of words, images, sounds, gestures and objects. Whilst for the linguist Saussure, 'semiology' was 'a science which studies the role of signs as part of social life', for the philosopher Charles Peirce 'semiotic' was the 'formal doctrine of signs' which was closely related to Logic (Peirce 1931-58, 2.227). For him, 'a sign is something which stands to somebody for something in some respect or capacity' (Peirce 1931-58, 2.228). He declared that 'every thought is a sign' (Peirce 1931-58, 1.538; cf. 5.250ff, 5.283ff). Contemporary semioticians study signs not in isolation but as part of semiotic 'sign systems' (such as a medium or genre). They study how meanings are made: as such, being concerned not only with communication but also with the construction and maintenance of reality. Semiotics and that branch of linguistics known as semantics have a common concern with the meaning of signs, but John Sturrock argues that whereas semantics focuses on what words mean, semiotics is concerned with how signs mean (Sturrock 1986, 22). For C W Morris (deriving this threefold classification from Peirce), semiotics embraced semantics, along with the other traditional branches of linguistics: semantics: the relationship of signs to what they stand for; syntactics (or syntax): the formal or structural relations between signs; pragmatics: the relation of signs to interpreters (Morris 1938, 6-7). Semiotics is often employed in the analysis of texts (although it is far more than just a mode of textual analysis). Here it should perhaps be noted that a 'text' can exist in any medium and may be verbal, non-verbal, or both, despite the logocentric bias of this distinction. The term text usually refers to a message which has been recorded in some way (e.g. writing, audio- and video-recording) so that it is physically independent of its sender or receiver. A text is an assemblage of signs (such as words, images, sounds and/or gestures) constructed (and interpreted) with reference to the conventions associated with a genre and in a particular medium of communication. Rahman in his journal article stated that ”Humans and their environment are two things that are inseparable from one another. Humans interact with components of the physical environment, both biotic (animals and plants) as well as with abiotic components (soil, water, rocks and others).” (Rahman, 2019). Communication is the main point in society, semiotics is the way to understand the meaning of the language in order to built the communication among people in this world. II. Discussion Typology of Signs: Sign, Signal, Index Semioticians have not yet agreed on a general typology of signs. The problem is only partly one of finding a common terminology. Partly it is also due to the multidimensionality of the criteria on which typologies of signs can be based. Some proposals for a typology of signs are an integral part of the semiotic theory of their authors. Such proposals are discussed in the chapters on Peirce and Morris (partly see also History of Semiotics). This chapter discusses some common typological distinctions and major dimensions of typologies of signs. It gives a survey of common restrictive definitions of the term sign and discusses definitions of the signal and of the index. For further major types of sign, see Symbol and Icon. 1. Some Proposals for a Typology of Signs Medieval semioticians had a great interest in the typology of signs. Modern semioticians concerned with this topic are Peirce, Morris, Husserl, Cassirer, Eco, and Sebeok. For further discussions of the typology of signs, see Schaff (1960: 14580), Resnikow (1964: on indices, signals, and symbols), Lyons (1977: on indices, icons, symbols, and symptoms), Nattiez (1979), and Clarke (1987: on signals and natural and conventional signs). For Bühler's distinction between symbols, symptoms, and signals, see also Function (3.1). 1.1 Natural and Nonnatural Signs Medieval semiotics began by distinguishing natural (signum naturale) from conventional (signum ad placidum) or intentional signs. Modern semiotics has raised several objections against this dichotomy. 1.1.1 Nature vs. Convention and Intention Augustine opposed natural and conventional signs (cf. Sign 2.2.2; for further aspects of Augustine's typological system, see Todorov 1977: 4554): Natural signs are those which, apart from any intention or desire of using them as signs, do yet lead to the knowledge of something else, as, for example, smoke when it indicates fire. For it is not from any intention of making it a sign that it is so, but through attention to experience we come to know that fire is beneath, even when nothing but smoke can be seen. [ . ] Conventional signs, on the other hand, are those which living beings mutually exchange for the purpose of showing [ . ] the feelings of their minds, or their perceptions, or their thoughts. (397: 637 = II. 12) Augustine's definition already mentions the criterion of intentionality. Roger Bacon later considered this criterion to be the most fundamental one. His basic distinction was between natural and intentional signs (for his complete typological system, see Howell 1987). 1.1.2 Objections against Nature In modern semiotics, two kinds of objections have been raised against accepting the nature vs. convention dichotomy as fundamental in the typology of signs: (1) objections claiming that any kind of semiosis must be based on some degree of conventionality (Eco's position, for example). (2) objections pointing out that the basic dichotomy is insufficient because icons and pictures, for example, are neither simply natural nor conventional. A solution to the latter objection is Peirce's indexicon symbol trichotomy. For a modern theory of natural signs, see Clarke (1987). 1.2 Symbol vs. Signal or Index The fundamental dichotomy established by medieval semiotics reappears in new theoretical contexts in some modern theories of semiotics. 1.2.1 Husserl Husserl (1890; 19001901: 269) drew a basic distinction between expressions (Ausdruck), which presuppose an intentional meaning endowing act (cf. Meaning 3.1.3), and indices (Anzeichen, translated as indication), where "we usually feel the connection" of the sign vehicle with the simultaneously or successively present object (Husserl 1900: 274). 1.2.2 Cassirer and Langer In Cassirer's Philosophy of Symbolic Forms, the primary distinction is between signals (or signs; cf. 3.1) and symbols: "a signal is a part of the physical world of being; a symbol is a part of the human world of meaning. Signals are 'operators'; symbols are 'designators.' Signals [ . ] have a sort of physical or substantial being; symbols have only a functional value" (1944: 32). In Cassirer's tradition, Langer divides the realm of signs into those which indicate (signals, symptoms, natural signs) and those which represent (symbols, names, pictures, etc.) (1942: 3539, 5467). 1.3 Sebeok's Six Signs Sebeok establishes a typology comprising six species of signs (1976: 11747). His definitions are: 1.3.1 Signal When a sign token mechanically or conventionally triggers some reaction on the part of a receiver, it is said to function as a signal.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Marshall Mcluhan
    Marshall McLuhan: Educational Implications* W.J. Gushue He received the Governor General's award for his work in literature, the Albert Schweitzer Chair at Fordham for his work in communications, and the Moison Award from the Canada Council as "explorer and interpreter of our age." He appeared on the covers of N eW8week, Saturday Review and Canada's largest weekend supplement. NBC made a one-hour docu­ mentary of his message and later repeated it, and the CBC gave him prime Sunday night viewing time on two occasions. He is one of the most publicized intellectuals of recent times. Ralph Thomas wrote in the Torfmto Star: "He has been explained, knocked and praised in just about every magazine in the EngIish, French, German and Italian languages." 1 As to newspaper coverage, which newspapers have not written about him? He has lectured city planners, advertising men, TV executives, university professors, students, and scientists; business men have sought his message from a yacht in the Aegean Sea, a hotel in the Laurentians, a former firehouse in San Francisco, and in the board rooms of IBM, General Electric, and Bell Telephone. Although "a torrent of criticism" has been heaped upon him by ':' Research for this paper was undertaken while Prof. Gushue was at the .ontario Institute for Studies in Education during the 1967-68 acad­ emic year. A slightly modified version was delivered at the C.A.P.E. conference in Calgary, June, 1968. - Ed. 3 4 Marshall McLuhan the old dogies of academe and the literary establishment, he has been eulogized in dozens of scholarly magazines and studied serious­ ly by thousands of intellectuals.2 The best indication of his worth is the fact that among his followers are to be found people (artists, really) who are part of what Susan Sontag calls "the new sensibility." 3 They are, to use Louis Kronenberger's phrase, "the symbol manipulators," the peo­ ple who are calling the shots - painters, sculptors, publishers, pub­ lic relations men, architects, film-makers, musicians, designers, consultants, editors, T.V.
    [Show full text]
  • Roth Book Notes--Mcluhan.Pdf
    Book Notes: Reading in the Time of Coronavirus By Jefferson Scholar-in-Residence Dr. Andrew Roth Mediated America Part Two: Who Was Marshall McLuhan & What Did He Say? McLuhan, Marshall. The Mechanical Bride: Folklore of Industrial Man. (New York: Vanguard Press, 1951). McLuhan, Marshall and Bruce R. Powers. The Global Village: Transformations in World Life and Media in the 21st Century. (New York: Oxford University Press, 1989). McLuhan, Marshall. The Gutenberg Galaxy: The Making of Typographic Man. (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1962). McLuhan, Marshall. Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man. (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1994. Originally Published 1964). The Mechanical Bride: The Gutenberg Galaxy Understanding Media: The Folklore of Industrial Man by Marshall McLuhan Extensions of Man by Marshall by Marshall McLuhan McLuhan and Lewis H. Lapham Last week in Book Notes, we discussed Norman Mailer’s discovery in Superman Comes to the Supermarket of mediated America, that trifurcated world in which Americans live simultaneously in three realms, in three realities. One is based, more or less, in the physical world of nouns and verbs, which is to say people, other creatures, and things (objects) that either act or are acted upon. The second is a world of mental images lodged between people’s ears; and, third, and most importantly, the mediasphere. The mediascape is where the two worlds meet, filtering back and forth between each other sometimes in harmony but frequently in a dissonant clanging and clashing of competing images, of competing cultures, of competing realities. Two quick asides: First, it needs to be immediately said that Americans are not the first ever and certainly not the only 21st century denizens of multiple realities, as any glimpse of Japanese anime, Chinese Donghua, or British Cosplay Girls Facebook page will attest, but Americans first gave it full bloom with the “Hollywoodization,” the “Disneyfication” of just about anything, for when Mae West murmured, “Come up and see me some time,” she said more than she could have ever imagined.
    [Show full text]
  • A Diagrammatic Approach to Peirce's Classifications of Signs
    A diagrammatic approach to Peirce’s classifications of signs1 Priscila Farias Graduate Program in Design (SENAC-SP & UFPE) [email protected] João Queiroz Graduate Studies Program on History, Philosophy, and Science Teaching (UFBA/UEFS) Dept. of Computer Engineering and Industrial Automation (DCA/FEEC/UNICAMP) [email protected] © This paper is not for reproduction without permission of the author(s). ABSTRACT Starting from an analysis of two diagrams for 10 classes of signs designed by Peirce in 1903 and 1908 (CP 2.264 and 8.376), this paper sets forth the basis for a diagrammatic understanding of all kinds of classifications based on his triadic model of a sign. Our main argument is that it is possible to observe a common pattern in the arrangement of Peirce’s diagrams of 3-trichotomic classes, and that this pattern should be extended for the design of diagrams for any n-trichotomic classification of signs. Once this is done, it is possible to diagrammatically compare the conflicting claims done by Peircean scholars re- garding the divisions of signs into 28, and specially into 66 classes. We believe that the most important aspect of this research is the proposal of a consolidated tool for the analysis of any kind of sign structure within the context of Peirce’s classifications of signs. Keywords: Peircean semiotics, classifications of signs, diagrammatic reasoning. 1. PEIRCE’S DIAGRAMS FOR 10 CLASSES OF SIGNS In a draft of a letter to Lady Welby composed by the end of December 1908 (dated 24-28 December, L463:132-146, CP 8.342-76, EP2:483-491; we will be referring to this diagram 1.
    [Show full text]
  • The Complexity of Richness: Media, Message, and Communication Outcomes
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by The University of North Carolina at Greensboro The complexity of richness: Media, message, and communication outcomes By: Robert F. Otondo, James R. Van Scotter, David G. Allen, Prashant Palvia Otondo, R.F., Van Scotter, J.R., Allen, D.G., and Palvia, P. ―The Complexity of Richness: Media, Message, and Communication Outcomes.‖ Information & Management. Vol. 40, 2008, pp. 21-30. Made available courtesy of Elsevier: http://www.elsevier.com ***Reprinted with permission. No further reproduction is authorized without written permission from Elsevier. This version of the document is not the version of record. Figures and/or pictures may be missing from this format of the document.*** Abstract: Dynamic web-based multimedia communication has been increasingly used in organizations, necessitating a better understanding of how it affects their outcomes. We investigated factor structures and relationships involving media and information richness and communication outcomes using an experimental design. We found that these multimedia contexts were best explained by models with multiple fine-grained constructs rather than those based on one- or two-dimensions. Also, media richness theory poorly predicted relationships involving these constructs. Keywords: Media richness theory; Information richness; Communication theory Article: 1. Introduction Investigation of relationships between the media and communication effectiveness has not provided consistent results. However, lack of understanding has not deterred organizations from investing heavily in new and dynamic forms of web-based multimedia for their marketing, public relations, training, and recruiting activities. Few studies have examined the effects of media channels and informational content on decision-making and other organizational outcomes.
    [Show full text]
  • The Commutation Test and Chris Bacon's Score for Source Code As
    The Commutation Test and Chris Bacon’s Score for Source Code as a Framework for Film Music Pedagogy Aaron Ziegel, Towson University he cinema, whether experienced at the neighborhood multiplex or streamed at home, is arguably the medium through which today’s col- lege-age Americans are most likely to encounter newly composed sym- Tphonic music. Given the ubiquity of the film-viewing experience, students are often eager to learn the tools and methodologies that can equip them to criti- cally assess and more fully comprehend the function of music in movies. The filmSource Code (2011), directed by Duncan Jones and scored by Chris Bacon, provides a particularly effective starting point through which this process can begin.1 This article will discuss the pedagogical potential found in the film’s main titles and the impact of applying a commutation test to this sequence. Although here I address one specific example, the methodology of the commu- tation test is easily adaptable to other circumstances, as the theoretical foun- dation will make clear. While variations on the commutation test are a regular occurrence in many film music classrooms, this essay aims to present an intro- ductory primer that may be of use to instructors interested in an entry point for incorporating film music studies into their teaching. With that in mind, the appendix presents one suggestion for how to create film clips for classroom use. The value of this classroom activity extends beyond providing students with an engaging and memorable learning experience. By situating this analysis I wish to express my gratitude to the many students at Towson University whose feedback and enthusiastic classroom participation, along with suggestions from the anonymous reviewers, helped me to refine the pedagogical approach described in this essay.
    [Show full text]
  • Copy Editing and Proofreading Symbols
    Copy Editing and Proofreading Symbols Symbol Meaning Example Delete Remove the end fitting. Close up The tolerances are with in the range. Delete and Close up Deltete and close up the gap. not Insert The box is inserted correctly. # # Space Theprocedure is incorrect. Transpose Remove the fitting end. / or lc Lower case The Engineer and manager agreed. Capitalize A representative of nasa was present. Capitalize first letter and GARRETT PRODUCTS are great. lower case remainder stet stet Let stand Remove the battery cables. ¶ New paragraph The box is full. The meeting will be on Thursday. no ¶ Remove paragraph break The meeting will be on Thursday. no All members must attend. Move to a new position All members attended who were new. Move left Remove the faulty part. Flush left Move left. Flush right Move right. Move right Remove the faulty part. Center Table 4-1 Raise 162 Lower 162 Superscript 162 Subscript 162 . Period Rewrite the procedure. Then complete the tasks. ‘ ‘ Apostrophe or single quote The companys policies were rewritten. ; Semicolon He left however, he returned later. ; Symbol Meaning Example Colon There were three items nuts, bolts, and screws. : : , Comma Apply pressure to the first second and third bolts. , , -| Hyphen A valuable byproduct was created. sp Spell out The info was incorrect. sp Abbreviate The part was twelve feet long. || or = Align Personnel Facilities Equipment __________ Underscore The part was listed under Electrical. Run in with previous line He rewrote the pages and went home. Em dash It was the beginning so I thought. En dash The value is 120 408.
    [Show full text]
  • Review: Marcello Barbieri (Ed) (2007) Introduction to Biosemiotics. the New Biological Synthesis
    tripleC 5(3): 104-109, 2007 ISSN 1726-670X http://tripleC.uti.at Review: Marcello Barbieri (Ed) (2007) Introduction to Biosemiotics. The new biological synthesis. Dordrecht: Springer Günther Witzany telos – Philosophische Praxis Vogelsangstr. 18c A-5111-Buermoos/Salzburg Austria E-mail: [email protected] 1 Thematic background without utterances we act as non-uttering indi- viduals being dependent on the discourse de- Maybe it is no chance that the discovery of the rived meaning processes of a linguistic (e.g. sci- genetic code occurred during the hot phase of entific) community. philosophy of science discourse about the role of This position marks the primary difference to language in generating models of scientific ex- the subject of knowledge of Kantian knowledge planation. The code-metaphor was introduced theories wherein one subject alone in principle parallel to other linguistic terms to denote lan- could be able to generate sentences in which it guage like features of the nucleic acid sequence generates knowledge. This abstractive fallacy molecules such as “code without commas” was ruled out in the early 50s of the last century (Francis Crick). At the same time the 30 years of being replaced by the “community of investiga- trying to establish an exact scientific language to tors” (Peirce) represented by the scientific com- delimit objective sentences from non-objective munity in which every single scientist is able the ones derived one of his peaks in the linguistic place his utterance looking for being integrated turn. in the discourse community in which his utter- ances will be proven whether they are good ar- 1.1 Changing subjects of knowledge guments or not.
    [Show full text]
  • Relational Categories
    Gentner, D., & Kurtz, K. (2005). Learning and using relational categories. In W. K. Ahn, R. L. Goldstone, B. C. Love, A. B. Markman & P. W. Wolff (Eds.), Categorization inside and outside the laboratory. Washington, DC: APA. Relational Categories Dedre Gentner and Kenneth J Kurtz Relational Categories This chapter is concerned with the acquisition and use of relational categories. By relational category, we mean a category whose membership is determined by a common relational structure rather than by common properties. For instance, for X to be a bridge, X must connect two other entities or points; for X to be a carnivore, X must eat animals. Relational categories contrast with entity categories such as tulip or camel, whose members share many intrinsic properties. Relational categories cohere on the basis of a core relationship ful- filled by all members. This relation may be situation-specific (e.g., passenger or accident) or enduring (e.g., carnivore or ratio). Relational categories abound in ordinary language. Some are restricted in their arguments: For example, car- nivores are animals who eat other animals. But for many relational catego- ries, the arguments can range widely: for example, a bridge can connect two concrete locations, or two generations, or two abstract ideas. As with bridge, the instances of a relational category can have few or no intrinsic properties in common with one another. Research on categories has mostly ignored relational categories, focusing instead on entity categories-categories that can be characterized in terms of intrinsic similarity among members, like those shown in Figure 9.1. Further, as Moos and Sloutsky (2004) point out, theories of categorization have often oper- ated under the assumption that all concepts are fundamentally alike.
    [Show full text]
  • (1) Communication Process
    Communication Process (1) The Communication Process Scholars have developed theories to Theories of how we explain how we communicate with each communicate: The other. Linear and Most of these theories are variations on Transactional two generally recognized models — the models Linear model and the Transactional model. Communication Process (2) Communication Process (3) This ancient cave First, let’s define what communication is. painting speaks to us across time through its Communication is symbolic human ability to symbolize. behavior systematized into written, In its representations of verbal, and nonverbal codes. the male figure, the bison, and the rhino, we Click here to learn more about this recognize a 40,000 ancient painting. year-old story of human experience — the hunt. 1 Communication Process (4) Communication Process (5) Symbols can tell us . When we systematize symbols, we create codes for communication. Here are different ways for symbolizing the letter “A.” . what to do. what not to do. where to get help. how to stay safe. Any person, place, thing, feeling, or idea can be symbolized. Communication Process (6) Communication Process (7) Now that you understand the symbolic nature Those who want to communicate must share the same symbol system. of communication, let’s return to the two models of communication mentioned earlier. A model is a representation used to show how individual parts work together to accomplish a specific purpose — in this case communication. 2 Linear Model of Linear Model of Communication (1) Communication (2) Linear model includes A source A message A channel Message Channel A receiver Views communication as a straight line, one The linear model is now way event, in which the process reverses Encodes regarded as being incomplete.
    [Show full text]
  • Discourse Transcription
    MNTA lBYABJMJB.A MPJEJB.S IN )LINGUISTICS VOLUrtlE 4: DISCOURSE TRANSCRIPTION JOHN W. DU BOIS, SUSANNA CUMMING STEPHAN SCHUETZE-COBURN, DANAE PAOLINO EDITORS DEPARTMENT OF LINGUISTICS UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SANTA BARBARA 199:2 Papers in Linguistics Linguistics Department University of California, Santa Barbara Santa Barbara, California 93106-3100 U.S.A. Checks in U.S. dollars should be made out to UC Regents with $5.00 added for overseas postage. If your institution is interested in an exchange agreement, please write the above address for information. Volume 1: Korean: Papers and Discourse Date $13.00 Volume 2: Discourse and Grammar $10.00 Volume 3: Asian Discourse and Grammar $10.00 Volume 4: Discourse Transcription $15.00 Volume 5: East Asian Linguistics $15.00 Volume 6: Aspects of Nepali Grammar $15.00 Volume 7: Prosody, Grammar, and Discourse in Central Alaskan Yup'ik $15.00 Proceedings from the fIrst $20.00 Workshop on American Indigenous Languages Proceedings from the second $15.00 Workshop on American Indigenous Languages Proceedings from the third $15.00 Workshop on American Indigenous Languages Proceedings from the fourth $15.00 Workshop on American Indigenous Languages PART ONE: INTRODUCTION CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 What is discourse transcription? . 1.2 The goal of discourse transcription . 1.3 Options . 1.4 How to use this book . CHAPTER 2. A GOOD RECORDING 9 2.1 Naturalness . 2.2 Sound . 2.3 Videotape . CHAPTER 3. GETTING STARTED 12 3.1 How to start transcribing . 3.2 Delicacy: Broad or narrow? . 3.3 Delicacy conventions in this book . PART TWO: TRANSCRIPTION CONVENTIONS CHAPTER 4.
    [Show full text]
  • MEANING, SEMIOTECHNOLOGIES and PARTICIPATORY MEDIA Ganaele Langlois
    CULTURE MACHINE VOL 12 • 2011 MEANING, SEMIOTECHNOLOGIES AND PARTICIPATORY MEDIA Ganaele Langlois Summary What is the critical purpose of studying meaning in a digital environment which is characterized by the proliferation of meanings? In particular, online participatory media platforms such as YouTube, Facebook, Wikipedia and Twitter offer a constant stream of user-produced meanings. In this new context of seemingly infinite ‘semiotic democracy’ (Fiske, 1987), where anybody can say anything and have a chance to be heard, it seems that the main task is to find ways to deal with and analyze an ever-expanding field of signification. This article offers a different perspective on the question of meaning by arguing that if we are to study meaning to understand the cultural logic of digital environments, we should not focus on the content of what users are saying online, but rather on the conditions within which such a thing as user expression is possible in the first place. That is, this article argues that we should focus less on signification, and more on the question of regimes of the production and circulation of meaning. By expanding the question of meaning and using it to explore commercial participatory media platforms, this article offers a new framework for looking at online communication: one that decentres human subjects from the production of meaning and that acknowledges the technocultural dimension of meaning as constituted by a range of heterogeneous representational and informational technologies, cultural practices and linguistic values. Online participatory media platforms offer an exemplar of the new conditions of the production and circulation of meaning beyond the human level: they offer rich environments where user input is constantly augmented, ranked, classified and linked with other types of content.
    [Show full text]
  • Semiosphere As a Model of Human Cognition
    494 Aleksei Semenenko Sign Systems Studies 44(4), 2016, 494–510 Homo polyglottus: Semiosphere as a model of human cognition Aleksei Semenenko Department of Slavic and Baltic Languages Stockholm University 106 91 Stockholm, Sweden e-mail: [email protected] Abstract. Th e semiosphere is arguably the most infl uential concept developed by Juri Lotman, which has been reinterpreted in a variety of ways. Th is paper returns to Lotman’s original “anthropocentric” understanding of semiosphere as a collective intellect/consciousness and revisits the main arguments of Lotman’s discussion of human vs. nonhuman semiosis in order to position it in the modern context of cognitive semiotics and the question of human uniqueness in particular. In contrast to the majority of works that focus on symbolic consciousness and multimodal communication as specifi cally human traits, Lotman accentuates polyglottism and dialogicity as the unique features of human culture. Formulated in this manner, the concept of semiosphere is used as a conceptual framework for the study of human cognition as well as human cognitive evolution. Keywords: semiosphere; cognition; polyglottism; dialogue; multimodality; Juri Lotman Th e concept of semiosphere is arguably the most infl uential concept developed by the semiotician and literary scholar Juri Lotman (1922–1993), a leader of the Tartu- Moscow School of Semiotics and a founder of semiotics of culture. In a way, it was the pinnacle of Lotman’s lifelong study of culture as an intrinsic component of human individual
    [Show full text]