Gary F and Jon AS,
Thanks for the comments. They're consistent with what I said
in my previous note.
Gary
the earliest text I’ve found where Peirce uses the term “token”:
CSP, late 1904 (EP2:326)
including under the term “sign” every picture, diagram, natural cry,
pointing finger, wink, knot in one’s handkerchief, memory, dream,
fancy, concept, indication, token, symptom, letter, numeral, word,
sentence, chapter, book, library, and in short whatever, be it in
the physical universe, be it in the world of thought, that, whether
embodying an idea of any kind...
In this quotation, Peirce is using the word 'token' as an example
on the same level as picture, diagram, natural cry...
That confirms my claim that in the earlier quotation (EP 2:303)
he had not yet chosen the word 'token' as a technical term in
his system. The quotation from 1906 (CP 4.537) is the most
widely quoted source for the triad Tone/Token/Type.
In any case, these examples show why we need complete, searchable
transcriptions of all of Peirce's MSS organized in chronological
order. But given the current sources, we can say
1. The 1904 quotations are from an early stage of Peirce's semiotic,
and they should not be considered definitive. The sentence
"A sign is not a real thing" from 1904 is not a reliable basis
for drawing firm conclusions about Peirce's complete system.
2. By 1906, he had developed his triad of tone/token/type. It
would be interesting to find any MSS that showed how, when,
and why he first chose those words.
3. Also in 1906, his research on modal logic led him to write
about the three "universes" of possibility, actuality, and
"the necessitated".
4. By combining modal logic with his system of signs, he coined
the triad Potisign/Actisign/Famisign. But in 1908, he said
that he preferred his earlier triad of more common words,
Tone/Token/Type. But he had some doubts about 'Tone', as
he said on 23 Dec 1908. See the attached EP2_480.jpg.
5. A few days later, he decided that 'Mark' was preferable
to 'Tone'.
Jon
I believe that Lady Welby's reply to Peirce's letter of December 23,
1908 asking her about Tone vs. Mark was the one dated January 21,
1909 (SS 86ff). Consequently, it came several weeks after he wrote
the other drafts of that letter.
Yes, but note that Lady W's reason was the same example that Peirce
gave in 1906 (CP 4.537):
Jon
if I remember right... she found Tone preferable because a tone
of voice is a paradigmatic example.
If Peirce was not satisfied with the word 'tone', the fact that
Lady W repeated his own example would not be convincing.
Furthermore, 'mark' is a common English word that can be used
for marks in any of the senses (as Peirce called them, Optical,
Tactile, and Acoustic). But 'tone' is limited to Acoustic.
Unless anyone can find later evidence that Peirce switched back
to 'tone', I would consider 'mark' to be his final choice.
Jon
My suggestion is that for the sake of greater clarity, we should
more carefully draw an explicit distinction between Signs as Types
and their Replicas as Tokens, as well as the significant characters
of the latter as Tones.
I agree with everything up to the final word in that sentence.
When I discuss or lecture about Peirce's triads, the word 'mark'
rolls off my tongue very smoothly, and people understand what I'm
trying to say. But the word 'tone' suggests a sound. It doesn't
generalize to other sensory modes.
John
-----------------------------
PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L
to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . To
UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu with the
line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at
http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
