Contents
|
sign"Now a sign is something, A, which denotes some fact or object, B, to some interpretant thought, C."Peirce: CP 1.346 See (A) representamen, (B) object, (C) interpretant
To distinguish
|
3"The science of semiotics has three branches. …The third, in imitation of Kant's fashion of preserving old associations of words in finding nomenclature for new conceptions, I call pure rhetoric. Its task is to ascertain the laws by which in every scientific intelligence one sign gives birth to another, and especially one thought brings forth another."Peirce: CP 2.229
|
1 rhematicRaising an idea.
A rhematic connection exists between sign and interpretant if the interpretant is nothing else then an idea called forth.
|
2 propositionalMaking a statement.The connection between sign and interpretant is propositional if an idea is being raised and in addition the idea is connected with an object. But a reaction other than 'it is true' or 'it is false' is not asked for.
Examples:
---------
|
3 argumentativeInfluencing the interpretant.
If a sign has an argumentative relation to its interpretant thought, then: Always the argumentative relation involves several propositions. The propositions must be connected with each other in a correct way. An informal example: A Nedtrain job opening in the Saturday newspaper to which the trademark of Nedtrain is attached. The newspaper section in which the advertisement is placed together with picture mark, name and accompanying text must reinforce each other in such a way that a suitable candidate is going to react.
There are three main types of argument: Each of them has its own merits. Design processes can be used to give a first rough impression of the different types of argument.
Usually they start with a briefing in which the commissioner formulates the aims. The designer uses them for inspiration and guidance and starts making sketches. Often two or three main lines of thought are pursued. This results in some proposals.
The proposals will be discussed with the commissioner. In ideal circumstances the different proposals will be evaluated against the background of the briefing statements. The later function as general rules with which the specific proposals are matched. The proposal that is most true to the general statement will be chosen for further development.
After finishing, let's say the trademark, the design is send into the world. This means that people are going to be confronted with instances of the design and instances of company behaviour. As a result interpretative habits are being generated.
|
making an inference
|
1 hypothesisCatchword: creativity
Hypotheses as a form of reasoning: X could of course also be a cat. Hypothesis is very unreliable, but it is the only form of reasoning that may teach you something really new.
|
2 deductionCatchword: trying to work on routine.
Deduction as a form of reasoning: Deduction is a highly reliable form of reasoning. But nothing new can be learned from deduction. There are two types of deduction
---------
|
3 inductionCatchword: the formation of habit.
Induction as a form of reasoning:
You will never be able to check all humans to find out whether they are mortal or not. This makes the inference less reliable than a deductive inference. But, the more cases you take into account, the more you can trust the conclusion. There are three types of induction
|
1the science of semiotic has three branches. The first is called by Duns Scotus grammatica speculativa. We may term it pure grammar. It has for its task to ascertain what must be true of the representamen used by every scientific intelligence in order that they may embody any meaning.Peirce: CP 2.229
|
1 qualisignQualisigns only have being as 'possibility to become embodied in a sign'. Imagine your whole consciousness filled with the impression of 'red', than you have the purest impression possible of a qualisign. They may be regarded as the primitive building blocks of signs, but beware for they are devoid of embodiment and they lack individuality.
Colour impressions, sounds, tactile impressions, impressions of taste en smell, but always in their most elementary form, without composition.
-------
|
2 sinsignSinsign is a derivation from singular sign. An individual combination of qualisigns with a here and now existence is a sinsign.Every individual thing can be a sinsign. That single wreath of smoke for instance that you noticed while walking one day, or the particular occurrence of a symptom of an illness you once had. The sinsign aspect rules the factual existence of our signs. See also: replica sinsign. Also known as token. The aura of a unique work of art, before the advent of its easy technical reproducibility has its foundation in the sinsign character. See also: Peirce: CP 2.245, 8.334, 8.334
-------
|
3 legisignFacing the big differences between different handwriting styles, how does it come that we can read and understand them? This capability is grounded in the legisign character of signs.A legisign is a law or a rule that functions as a sign. We never meet legisigns 'direct'; they need a (replica) sinsign for their embodiment. So a legisign is a general type that bestows significance to its instances. The words 'one', 'One' en '1' differ in some respects (shape, place). Still we know that we are dealing with the same word. This is due to the legisign character of the sign. Conventional signs for instance are legisigns. Also known as 'type'. See: Peirce: CP 2.246, 8.334, 8.335
--------------
|
replica sinsignAn embodiment of a legisign is called a replica sinsign or also a replica of a legisign.The words 'one', '1' and 'one' that appear here and now on your screen are three separate sinsigns. But only of course if we disrespect the instability of individual signs on a screen due to the refresh rate and the passage of time. Otherwise we have much more sinsigns.
|
1 representamen"Now a sign is something, A, which denotes some fact or object, B, to some interpretant thought, C."Peirce: CP 1.346 See object, interpretant
To distinguish To consider a sign in itself is strictly speaking impossible, for we have in that case no way of dealing with the relations between a sign and the object(s) it stands for or the relations between a sign and the interpretant thought(s). In which case we drop the essence of the sign and look at it as if it were an object. Still, if, for the sake of analysis, we disregard the relations between on the one hand signs and on the other hand their objects and their interpretant thoughts and we look at all the signs we have met as if they stood aloof, what can we say about them?
1. They have an internal structure or, in other words, they consist of combinations of qualities.
|
2 objectAs with the interpretant we may look at the object from different perspectives. We can look at:1 the kinds of objects possible 2 the ways a sign may stand for or is connected with its objects. Since the concept of interpretant is derived from the concept of sign, I will start with 2.
2 relations between sign and object
|
1 direct object"But it is necessary to distinguish the Immediate Object, or the Object as the Sign represents it, from the Dynamical Object, or really efficient but not immediately present Object."Peirce: CP 8.343
-------
|
2 dynamical object"..from the Dynamical Object, which is the Reality which by some means contrives to determine the Sign to its Representation."Peirce: CP 4.536 Since the status of knowledge is problematic we may further distinguish different kinds of knowledge, according to their status. See 1. knowledge and 2. knowledge
--------
|
1 (knowledge)What exactly an object is, is hard to decide. The opinions differ widely. The distinction between knowledge 1 and knowledge 2 has been made here to distinguish at least tentative between:1. our (individual or collective) knowledge of the realm of objects 2. the ultimate knowledge that proves to hold true
But this does not make the distinction less problematic.
Objecten en contradicties Appeared in: Verslag van de vierde Toogdag Peirce. Broek in Waterland 31, May 1991
|
2 knowledgeWhat exactly an object is, is hard to decide. The opinions differ widely. The distinction between knowledge 1 and knowledge 2 has been made here to distinguish at least tentative between:1. our (individual or collective) knowledge of the realm of objects 2. the ultimate knowledge that proves to hold true
But this does not make the distinction less problematic.
Objecten en contradicties Appeared in: Verslag van de vierde Toogdag Peirce. Broek in Waterland 31, May 1991
|
3 interpretantAs with the object we may look at the interpretant from different perspectives. We can look at:1 the kinds of interpretants possible 2 the ways a sign may address its interpretants. 3 [Probably: the codes that rule the ways in which the interpreting mind: a. reads composed signs, b. sees the way in which the sign represents the object, c. feels itself addressed by the sign.] Since the concept of interpretant is derived from the concept of sign I will start with 2.
2 Relations sign - interpretant
A sign may:
1 the kinds of interpretants possible
|
1 emotional interpretantSomething enters the interpreting mind, there is a mental, emotional unrest. This can be a very limited effect as when we try in vain to catch the attention of somebody working very concentrated, but also quite extensive like when we experience a piece of music or an action painting.
|
2 energetic interpretantIt entered as a single act and settles as something potentially meaningful.
1. In our body as an impulse
|
1 mentalA sign gives rise to an effort. This may be a physical effort like when we follow a command: sit!But more often this will be an exertion upon our internal world. But at this stage it is never the meaning of a concept, for the meaning is general while this effort is a single act.
|
2 physicalA sign gives rise to an effort. This may be a physical effort like when we follow a command: sit!
|
3 logical interpretantThe sign after entering and settling itself in the interpreting mind may undergo some subsequent treatment:1. the sign is evaluated, begins to have its signifying effects. 2. The sign results in action or not depending on the results of the valuation 3. The results of the above treatment are evaluated. This may or may not result in a change of habit or expectations. See: immediate, dynamic and normal interpretant
|
1 immediateThe immediate interpretant is the interpretant that arises when the ordinary meaning of the sign is being grasped.
-----
|
2 dynamicalThe dynamical interpretant is the actual effect that the sign brings forth. It is the mental or physical reaction.
-----
|
3 normal"Finally there is what I provisionally term the Final Interpretant, which refers to the manner in which the Sign tends to represent itself to be related to its Object. I confess that my own conception of this third interpretant is not yet quite free from mist."Peirce: CP 4.536
------
|
2"..the science of semiotic has three branches...The second is logic proper. It is the science of what is quasi-necessarily true of the representamina of any scientific intelligence in order that they may hold good of any object, that is, may be true. Or say, logic proper is the formal science of the conditions of the truth of representations." Peirce: CP 2.229
|
1 iconicExpressing what something is like, saying something about some thing.
An iconic relation exists when the sign and object have characters in common. A not manipulated photograph is an example. But still a tricky one for the elements of photo and photographed reality do not correspond exactly, is not 1 to 1.
For instance, take a car and compare: see also designations
|
1 imageA not manipulated photograph approximates a pure iconic relation
-----
|
2 indexicalTo indicate, designate what you are dealing with.A pure indexical relation exists between a sign and its object when they have a direct physical connection, like smoke and fire or the weathercock and the wind. But as with iconic relation's conventions enter the game quickly. The pointer of a thermometer has a complicated and today logically mediated relation with the outside world. An index is a sinsign that has an indexical relation with its object. See also: replica index
|
3 symbolicLearning a 'language'By far the most signs we encounter have a relation with their objects that is mediated by conventions. We are only able to make the connection because we learned rules. Words have a symbolic relation with their objects. We learned what kind of object are designated by 'horse', 'table' and mind. But there are lots of other kinds of symbols. Take for example the Nike trademark. You can't tell by the wing that it is pointing to a business and calls forth at the same time the idea of victory. Symbols can be iconic and/or indexical. In languages like English a noun, like horse, is iconic. It aims at picturing objects. But also a complete story, for instance a metaphor, can be iconic. Demonstratives are indexical, they point at objects without conveying any information about them, like the word 'there'. In trademarks we often encounter the combination of a picture mark with a company name. The picture mark often expresses in a iconic way what we may expect from the company that is designated by the indexical name. See for example the NedTrain trademark.
But beware:
------------
|
replica of an indexNot a real index, but an index that needs conventions in order to be understood.
|
1 designationsA designation indicates the subject dealt with, it conveys the universe of discourse, that of scientific reality, commerce or other.
Perhaps
|
2 reagents"Reagents are indices that may be used to ascertain facts."Peirce: CP 8.368 A real measuring rod and the use of a distance description in a measure system are examples of the sub species. See real reagent, description of reagent.
---------
|
real reagentA real measure rod
-------
|
discription of reagentIf I say, I live two miles from the town centre, I claim that a measuring rod of a specified length fits x times in the distance between my house and the centre.
|
replica of an iconNot a real icon, but an icon mediated by conventions.See also icon.
|
3 metaphorImagery language based on comparison. Metaphor is more symbolic than a diagram and a metonym.
|
1 diagramA diagram is a graphical representation of the relations between entities. The indices are not saturated, free for specific interpretations.
-------
|
2 metonymImagery language based on a mutual relation, i.e. I saw a Van Gogh.The physical relation between a painting and its painter is being used. But you have to know that such a relation exists in order to grasp the meaning.
---------
|