Jon, List, Thank you for your comments. You very precisely describe what I call the standard model of Peircean semiotics. In the paper I argue why we need to move beyond the standard model, and I show how we can do it. I am aware that these ideas are somewhat controversial. However, as I write in the paper, my aim here is not to show how Peirce thought, but how Peirce’s work can be used to solve contemporary problems in semiotics.
Thank you for pointing out that Peirce's tone, token, type trichotomy *replaces *the division of the sign into qualisign, sinsign, and legisign in his later work. I will look into that. Best, Hugo Den man. 16. jun. 2025 kl. 17.58 skrev Jon Alan Schmidt < [email protected]>: > Hugo, List: > > Thank you for sharing a link to your paper, along with its abstract, and > for including a reference to my own paper on Peirce's interpretant > trichotomies. I am not in a position to digest it fully right now, but I > must confess that my initial assessment is that it exhibits a serious > misunderstanding of semiotics in general and Peirce's doctrine of signs in > particular. For one thing, the division of the sign into immediate and > dynamic correlates is obviously incompatible with his careful phaneroscopic > analysis establishing that any *one *sign has *two *objects and *three > *interpretants. > The "really efficient sign" (p. 16) in any *actual *event of semiosis is > not "the dynamical sign," it is a sign *token *as distinguished from a *tone > *or a *type *in Peirce's late taxonomies (replacing > qualisign/sinsign/legisign). For another, the *directionality *of > semiosis--from the object through the sign toward the interpretant--is > absolutely fundamental, as spelled out in what I consider to be Peirce's > clearest definition, which you quote on pp. 8-9. > > CSP: I will say that a sign is anything, of whatsoever mode of being, > which mediates between an object and an interpretant; since it is both > determined by the object *relatively to the interpretant*, and determines > the interpretant *in reference to the object*, in such wise as to cause > the interpretant to be determined by the object through the mediation of > this "sign." The object and the interpretant are thus merely the two > correlates of the sign; the one being antecedent, the other consequent of > the sign. (EP 2:410, 1907) > > > You claim that this is "just one type of sign action" (p. 18), but as > Peirce says here and throughout his relevant writings, it is in fact the *only > *type of sign action. Accordingly, in *any *genuine triadic relation of > mediation, the source is the object, the mediator is the sign, and the > outcome is the interpretant. Your five other "ways of mediation" confuse > not only this terminology, but also the underlying concepts. That which > mediates is *always *the sign, *never *the object or interpretant, > although one or both of these might likewise *be *a sign with *its own* > object and interpretant. The object *always *determines the sign *to > *determine > the interpretant, *never *any other arrangement. In fact, after giving > the quoted definition, Peirce goes on to reiterate that "the *essential > *difference > there is between the nature of an object and that of an interpretant ... is > that the former antecedes, while the latter succeeds the sign" (ibid., > emphasis mine)--the object *always *antecedes the sign, and the > interpretant *always *succeeds the sign. > > Regards, > > Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA > Structural Engineer, Synechist Philosopher, Lutheran Christian > www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt / twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt > > On Sun, Jun 15, 2025 at 4:16 AM Hugo F. Alrøe <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> List, Cécile >> >> The paper on the six types of sign action that I mentioned on the list a >> little while ago has now been published online in Semiotica. The paper is >> open access, and I have included a link and the abstract below. >> >> As I write in the paper, I am thankful for inspiration from Peirce-L over >> the years and in particular for the spiral-shaped drawing of the triadic >> sign in semiosis provided by Cécile Cosculluela in the thread “Graphical >> Representations of the Sign by Peirce,” January 2024, which inspired my >> depiction of a "mediating representation" in the paper. >> >> All the best, >> Hugo >> >> Alrøe, Hugo F. (2025) The six types of sign action. Semiotica. >> https://doi.org/10.1515/sem-2024-0112 >> >> Abstract >> The Peircean doctrine of signs is incomplete. This paper rethinks the >> standard model of sign action to provide a common framework for analyzing >> all the different kinds of semiotic processes, including the workings of >> thinking creatures, sentient beings, single cell organisms, social systems, >> and sciences. Through a detailed theoretical analysis, the paper shows how >> we can separate *mediation *(featuring the steps: source, mediator, and >> outcome) from *representation* (featuring the conventional sign >> correlates: object, sign, and interpretant) in Peircean semiotics and >> combine the two to establish a general model of sign action. This leads to >> the fundamental and, in a Peircean context, somewhat controversial ideas >> that there are not two but three dynamical sign correlates and, notably, >> that there is not one direction of mediation in the sign triad, but six >> directions, which constitute six fundamental types of sign action: >> *perceiving*, *acting*, *interpreting*, *expressing*, *sensing*, and >> *reacting*. The sixfold model of sign action is a step toward a general >> theory of semiosis, it promises to reconcile the split in biosemiotics, and >> it provides a coherent semiotic foundation for a general theory of >> observation in science. Chiefly, it offers a workable framework for >> semiotics. >> >> -- >> Hugo F. Alrøe, PhD >> Email: hugo.f.alroe \at/ gmail.com >> Web: hugo.alroe.dk >> > _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ > ARISBE: THE PEIRCE GATEWAY is now at > https://cspeirce.com and, just as well, at > https://www.cspeirce.com . It'll take a while to repair / update all the > links! > ► PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON > PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] > . > ► To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message NOT to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] > with UNSUBSCRIBE PEIRCE-L in the SUBJECT LINE of the message and nothing in > the body. More at https://list.iu.edu/sympa/help/user-signoff.html . > ► PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP; moderated by Gary Richmond; and > co-managed by him and Ben Udell. -- Hugo F. Alrøe, PhD Email: [email protected] Web: hugo.alroe.dk
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ARISBE: THE PEIRCE GATEWAY is now at https://cspeirce.com and, just as well, at https://www.cspeirce.com . It'll take a while to repair / update all the links! ► PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] . ► To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message NOT to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] with UNSUBSCRIBE PEIRCE-L in the SUBJECT LINE of the message and nothing in the body. More at https://list.iu.edu/sympa/help/user-signoff.html . ► PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP; moderated by Gary Richmond; and co-managed by him and Ben Udell.
