Semiosis

Semiosis (English: semiosis ) refers to the " process in which something functions as a sign ," the drawing process.

The term was introduced by Charles Sanders Peirce. Its real significance is dependent on the underlying theory of semiosis. Fundamentally, the theory of Peirce. Prominent variations are those of Charles W. Morris and Umberto Eco. A sociologically oriented variant is the Eliseo Verón.

• 2.1 concept of semiosis
• 2.2 The four components of semiosis
• 2.3 The interpreter
• 2.4 The denotation / designat
• 2.5 The behavioral interpretation
• 2.6 criticism

Semiosis according to Peirce

Concept of semiosis

According to Peirce 's semiotics " the doctrine of the true nature and the basic variations of possible semiosis ". The semiosis is then the real object of semiotics.

Peirce defined semiosis (English: semiosis ) as

The sign is for Peirce a form of thirdness - an abstruse concept, which is explained in more detail below.

Components of semiosis

The three correlates, which are related, identifies and names Peirce as follows:

• Representamen - ( sign, representamen ) - (the outer character shape gives the sign in the narrow sense )
• Object - (object ) - ( the physical or psychological reference object, and the object to which the sign refers )
• Interpretant - ( interpretant, signification ) - ( the meaning of the sign )

The interpretant

The term was introduced by Peirce and interpretant refers to by a representamen ( the outer semaphore ) the interpreter, the interpreter generated "thoughts", a "some interpretive consciousness." Meaning is construed " as an emotional, or cognitive aktuale effect in the consciousness of the artist ."

Peirce himself:

The immediate interpretation is inconsistent. After an objectifying view is to understand " synonym or an explanation of the first character " under an interpretant. Thus the view of Peirce the structuralist view is approximated character and " not so different from the semantic content " be interpretant.

The interpretant as a sign in an infinite semiosis

According to Peirce, the interpretant itself is again a sign within the meaning of representamen. Also, the interpretant is subject as a sign ( representamen ) a semiosis. This results in an unlimited, infinite semiosis. Thinking is regarded as the " combination of characters in an unlimited chain of associations of ideas in which we are constantly entangled without being always clear about us." In everyday life, this " infinite regress semiotic " but aborted at an early stage.

The reality and truth regarding the infinite semiosis

Peirce postulated " that semiosis reality- and truth- oriented ' in the long run ' on an ' ultimate opinion' zulaufe as, in the real ( 'the object' ) of predication has become accessible "

Peirce himself:

The infinite regress semiotic Make Contact " in its entirety, the network virtual sign that guarantees thinking for the community subjects reality."

The Italian semiotician Ugo Volli exemplified such recourses from medial- cultural Waiting as follows:

"The concept of unlimited semiosis [ is ] extremely interesting for an analysis of the culture [, ] as the mass communication [, ]. Because the idea [that] will be indicated any sign of a subsequent in potentially endless ranking which implies [that] every culture resistant character translated into other characters, thereby creating an uninterrupted sequence of interpretations that are deposited respectively on the previous interpretations. [ ... ] About [ is ] the mass media phenomenon familiar in a televised event is often picked up by the newspapers of the [ next day ]. [ ... ] This article in turn solve a television or radio discussion from [ ... ] that it finds on the day a press response or ends up in the shredder, and experienced a TV Parody, later zeitigt a book, etc. The same happens with famous images, seals, songs, proverbs [ ... ]. Culture is thus from a certain viewpoint to the practice of unlimited semiosis. "

The semiosis as a category of thirdness

Peirce developed his ideas of semiosis against the linguistically oriented direction of semiotics, as it is mainly of Saussure known from logic and epistemology. Peirce goal was to improve epistemological and metaphysical universality universality, while Saussure went to the application. In Peirce 's semiosis subject of ontology and phenomenology, based on three universal categories: the Firstness, secondness and thirdness.

In the Firstness is a mode of being in which everything unrelated to each other " is the way it is " ( Peirce ). The unmediated way, mere feelings and spontaneity include, for example in this category of options. In the secondness to relations between facts and their comparison form. The semiosis is the category of thirdness to which, among other characters, laws, customs, and the phenomena of the necessities are.

Peirce is pursuing a pansemiotisches concept that determines his view of the universe. Because of this view also thoughts are signs, man is also a sign. Semiotic studies are thus for Peirce the basis of all science, because without them there is no science been able to look at its subject.

The boundaries of the semiotic field

For Peirce, the semiotic field is unlimited. Characters have according to its universalism on getting more characters. Much of the semiotics borders the semiotic field to the extensive range of signification and the narrower field of communication. Further narrowed the semiotic process in linguozentristischen approaches. In the method for the analysis of semiotic phenomenon in the context of language in Greimas (1917-1992) no theory of signs exist anymore.

Criticism

The semiosis theories of Morris and Eco can be also interpreted as a criticism of the theory of Peirce.

A fundamental criticism has the semiosis concept of Peirce experienced by the deconstruction of Derrida: After deconstruction, the idea of ​​a semiotic signified is give up " and to think of the finite- variable Zeichenfluß itself as the only infinity". For the deconstructionist the semiosis is a " deconstructive floating of the signifier ."

Semiosis by Charles Morris

Charles W. Morris takes up the concept of semiosis Peirce and absorbs some cases behavioral basis to make changes and additions. The semiosis theory of Morris is subject to modifications in turn.

Concept of semiosis

Morris defines the semiosis itself as follows:

The four components of semiosis

The semiosis is at Morris of four components:

• From what acts as a character (the character );
• From that to which the sign gives a lecture ( the denotation / designat );
• From the effect that the character causes the recipient and the recipient can recognize it as a sign ( the interpretant );
• From the character performers ( the interpreter ).

The Artist

Notwithstanding Peirce Morris relates the interpreter, the interpreter, in his semiosis model expressly.

The denotation / designat

The object in Peirce differentiated Morris in denotation and designat. Later (1964 ) merges Morris the denotations and only speaks of the signified or of Signifkation.

Denotations are the existing reference objects of a character in Morris. These are also elements of the characters from the designated class ( designat ).

" The designat is not a thing but an object type or a class of objects - and a class can have many elements, one element or no element included. ". 1955 Morris has designat " by intentionally defined" significatum "shall be replaced and maintained the opposition to the denotation. "

The behavioral interpretation

The definition of semiosis and the sign at Morris takes place in the behavioral model, for which the associated overcome the " introspective (s) in school psychology " speak. A behavioristic interpretation should not be mandatory but after the self-understanding.

Thus, " as seen from the behaviorist point of view .. the note acquisition of D in the presence of Z conditional on Z by the reaction response to D. ".

Behavioristically the denotation is understood as something, " that would allow the completion of the reaction sequence to which a performer is scheduled due to a character ."

Also, the interpretant " strictly behavioristic " is defined as " disposition of an artist, because a character to react with a reaction sequence of a behavioral family " - with the consequence that there is no need infinite semiosis more.

Criticism

The semiosis theory of Morris is the behaviorist foundation held (which Morris himself as not deemed necessary ). The model of Morris was a " kryptodydisches character model ", have a " physikalismusnahe, bipolar stimulus-response structure" and this, although the semiosis not " behavioristic - objective" could be taken.

Semiosis by Umberto Eco

Eco draws on the theory of infinite semiosis à la Peirce. This is the only way that a semiotic system " on themselves accountable," depositing.

The interpretant within the meaning of the content of consciousness and individually recognized meaning is culturally influenced by eco, so that the characters meaning is postulated as the " cultural unity ".

This leads rejection of an equivalent model for the " Design of a multi-dimensional openness of the character".

The "social semiosis " by Eliseo Verón

The Argentine semiotician Eliseo Verón developed in his work La semiosis Social ( 1987) (translated: The social semiosis ) an extension of semiosis according to Peirce that the social component, ie the social framework involves. With this and other considerations, the so-called Soziosemiotik was established, which examines the impact of social phenomena on the character processing by humans.